EDITORIAL : THE DAWN, PAKISTAN

Cricket diplomacy

INDIAN Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s invitation to President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani to watch the Cricket World Cup semi-final between the two countries is not quite a googly — cricket diplomacy has been used in the past — but can something come of the gesture? First, the positives. The peace process, stalled since November 2008, appears to be cautiously edging back on track. The interior secretaries of the two countries are to meet on Monday-Tuesday in New Delhi; next month, the commerce and trade secretaries are to meet; and in July the foreign secretaries and ministers are scheduled to meet in New Delhi. All these meetings will take place in the light of the reasonably promising joint statement issued in Thimphu in February by the foreign secretaries, which read in part:

“[The foreign secretaries] agreed on the need for a constructive dialogue between India and Pakistan to resolve all outstanding issues. They affirmed the need to carry forward the dialogue process.”

Off the cricket field, there are also some quick diplomatic ‘wins’ that are within grasp. Siachen and Sir Creek remain two problems to which the solutions have long been known and all but agreed on. But in Pakistan there is a perception that the Indian military has dug its heels in on both issues. For example, from a military perspective, India has the upper hand in Siachen and that appears to be something the Indian military is unwilling to give up. Similarly, a more relaxed visa regime and some trade concessions by both sides are within reach — if both sides de-monstrate the necessary maturity and spirit of understanding.

While there are positives to be found in the present situation, there remain many reasons to be cautious. The Indian prime minister may have his legacy in mind while reaching out to Pakistan, but scandals at home have weakened both his and his government’s position. Even if he wants to, it is far from clear if the Indian prime minister can go beyond gestures and offer something substantive. Equally, on this side of the border, there are reasons to be cautious about the establishment’s ability to compromise on India at the moment. From Indian involvement in Afghanistan to India’s hydro projects on rivers that are a lifeline for Pakistan, there are serious concerns here about India’s actions that could have a chilling effect on whatever gains the diplomats may be able to engineer. But both sides must be careful to not endlessly roam the space between a breakdown in ties and a breakthrough — talks for talks’ sake will fatigue both publics.

Tough challenge

REAL estate in Pakistan is expensive. The advertisements in Sunday newspapers are evidence of this — the sales price quotes run into multiple millions of rupees. Given that each sales transaction is subject to tax, the federal and provincial governments ought to be earning significant amounts of revenue. That is the theory. In reality, the government earns only a tiny amount of the sum exchanged since property is officially registered at a fraction of its market value. The official price of the land, which is meant to be reviewed annually, is kept low by a nexus of corruption which deprives the government of tax revenue that would contribute significantly towards solving its financial problems. Real estate transactions are conducted in effec-tively two ‘stages’, the first where the payment is based on the official rate, and the second where the balance dictated by the market price is transferred. It is not just private individuals that defraud the public exchequer in this way. Government and other agencies such as the development authorities in Islamabad, Lahore and Karachi, the Defence Housing Authorities and Cantonment Boards in various cities are to a greater or lesser extent all colluders in the under-valuing of expensive real estate. Some banks offering mortgage loans issue more than one cheque.

It is therefore encouraging that early reports about the next budget say that there are plans to revise the system. A senior FBR official told this newspaper on Thursday that an exercise is under way to link the tax imposed on transactions to the market-rate value of property. If achieved, this would significantly improve the financial situation of the federal and provincial governments. However, the challenge faced by the FBR is daunting. It will face tough opposition from the people and organisations, many of them functionaries of the government, that are benefiting from the current system. The FBR must stand firm, though. The official value of real estate must match its market price. Real estate transactions involve massive sums of money and there is no reason why corrupt practices should deprive the government of its legitimate revenue.

Afghan nationals

A NEWS report based on last Thursday’s proceedings in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly offers evidence of what could be called the country’s preferential ‘AFAM’ policy that lumps together two close allies. The report suggests the Afghans and the Americans exist outside the government’s definition of foreigners. Incredibly, only five US nationals are shown by the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa home department ledger to be staying in the pro-vince right now. This is a ‘huge’ presence considering that official figures fail to record the presence of any Americans in the province in 2009-2010.

At the same time, the Afghans are also not considered foreign enough to make it to the list of aliens, even though some 350 of them receive their visas daily from the Pakistani embassy in Kabul alone.

The Afghans and their neighbours in the Pakistani areas speak the same language, are connected by familial ties and brought together by cultural and business interests. These linkages did make it easier for millions of Afghan refugees to assimilate in Pakistan. But here we are talking about people with a foreign passport and a Pakistani visa. Even in the case of Afghan refugees, while they were extended special treatment here, in recent years much emphasis has been put on their repatriation based on an assertion of their identity as Afghan nationals. Why would the authorities then not want to register bona fide Afghan visitors to Pakistan? Indeed, it may be easier to have records for them than for many others who travel to and fro without documents. The fact that even Pakistani nationals are routinely required to prove their origins to the picket-minders here should have made exemptions that much more difficult. This laxity is not new to Pakistan. However, with each new incident, it is more frustrating than it was in the past.