EDITORIAL : THE DAWN, PAKISTAN

Strained ties

IT has been a challenging week in the life of the US-Pakistan relationship. In protest against a drone strike that killed about 45 people attending a jirga in North Waziristan, Pakistan has pulled out of trilateral talks with the US and Afghanistan scheduled later this week. Relations are tense, with official condemnations delivered both publicly by Pakistan`s army chief and in private to the US State Department. But as rough as this patch seems, it is not inconsistent with the history of US-Pakistan relations. Lack of trust in America has almost always been a part of the political discourse in the country. Most Pakistanis do not approve of American policies in the region, and have for decades believed that the US has either betrayed Pakistan in times of need or used their country to achieve regional policy goals only to abandon it once those objectives have been met. With the developments of the last few days, this trust deficit seems to have widened once again.

Whether or not Pakistani perceptions are true, the fact remains that at such a tense juncture, missteps must be avoided to prevent tensions from snowballing. The real state of the alliance is shrouded in secrecy — neither administration is particularly honest with the public about the terms of engagement — and it remains unclear whether recent developments mark a hiccup along the way or permanent damage. But the slightest mishandling of the current situation could result in the speedy deterioration of relations. Gen Petraeus`s call for military action in North Waziristan the day after the drone attack, for example, displayed continuing insensitivity to Pakistan`s domestic compulsions. At the same time, Pakistan must think carefully about what it hopes to achieve by shunning the trilateral talks. Signals are an important tool in diplomacy, but at a time like this each move should be thought through with sensitivity and with an eye to the long-term health of the partnership.
As recent events have once again proved, the sooner the US realises the need to change both its tactics and strategy in dealing with Pakistan, the better the outcome will be for both countries and for the struggle against extremism and militancy in the region. Both parties are aware that they depend on each other: America for achieving its goals in Afghanistan and Fata, and Pakistan for economic assistance. Putting arrogance and inflexibility aside, the two sides must have an honest discussion about their respective strategic interests and how these can be achieved through a joint effort. A focus on narrow self-interest is not the approach this relationship needs.

Nuclear energy

A WEEK after the double disaster that triggered the explosions and radiation leaks at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactor, Japan raised the accident level at the facility from four to five on a seven-point international danger scale for atomic accidents. This put the Fukushima situation in the category of an “accident with wider consequences”. On the same scale, the 1986 Chernobyl disaster — the worst nuclear accident the world has ever experienced — is rated at the maximum level of seven.

Japan is fire-fighting to the best of its ability. Given the context of its 1945 atomic tragedy, it can be safely said that Japan would have ensured that safety measures at its nuclear installations were as stringent as possible. Perhaps that is why many countries are heeding lessons from the tragedy, realising that the seemingly win-win option of nuclear energy must be revisited. In recent years several people, including environmental activists, have accepted the idea of nuclear power plants as clean and efficient sources of energy generation. Nuclear plants have been hailed as power generators of the future, helping countries meet their carbon emission- reduction targets. Yet the fact is that nuclear technology is dangerous technology, and as the predicament faced by Japan illustrates, man can guard against any force save that of nature.

Hence the scramble to review safety levels of nuclear units and to focus, in particular, on contingency plans in case of a natural disaster. Many countries are facing renewed protests by the anti-nuclear lobby. US President Barack Obama has ordered a comprehensive review of the country`s nuclear plants. Germany, too, has put in place a moratorium on extending the operation of existing plants in order to review safety standards — even though this is likely to lead to an increase in carbon emissions. What is needed now is a global debate on the viability of nuclear energy as a sustainable option. People`s faith in nuclear energy has been shaken, and their governments must be sensitive to their sentiments. Further, it is time the world started looking for alternative yet viable and sustainable solutions to its energy requirements.

Plague of plagiarism

RECENT years have seen a number of allegations that the research papers submitted or published by some faculty members of universities and other institutions of higher learning contain content plagiarised from the work of other scholars. In a case that came to light the other day, the accusatory finger has now been pointed at none other than the vice-chancellor of the University of Peshawar. It is claimed by a teacher at the same university that passages in a book authored by the VC bear a striking resemblance to the works of two other writers. For his part, the vice-chancellor denies any wrongdoing and the Higher Education Commission is said to be looking into the matter. The HEC’s probe must be conducted with due diligence, for two key reasons. A half-hearted effort will not only leave a cloud of suspicion hanging over the accused irrespective of his guilt or innocence, it may also embolden potential plagiarists and send a signal that they can cheat on their research and get away with it. In-house investigations into purported plagiarism carried out by university syndicates have not always been satisfactory and the same lack of zeal must not be the hallmark of this most recent case.
A key part of the problem here is that many writers, be they scholars, journalists or development sector experts, are not fully aware of what constitutes plagiarism. There is even less of a grasp on the gravity of the crime. Wittingly or otherwise, the perpetrators are not merely cheating — they are robbing others of their intellectual property and perhaps even some part of their soul. Ideas lie at the core of what makes us human and it is originality of thought that moves societies forward. Little real intellectual advancement can be expected if stealing the thoughts of others is all we can do.