EDITORIAL : THE DAWN, PAKISTAN

In camera session

THE picture emerging from the in camera session of parliament on Friday is somewhat reminiscent of the real-life national portrait provided by the 2008 general election: all participants have got something out of the exercise. The supreme parliament should be happy that after all these years of exclusivity Osama bin Laden has provided it with an opportunity to hold the country`s military accountable for its action, or lack thereof. The government should be satisfied with its performance in the joint session, which besides allowing it to work for the protection of national interests, gave it room to forge ever closer ties with the army which is a decisive force in the country`s political matters. The opposition PML-N also used the forum to voice its demand for the resignation of the ISI director general and finally an end to the ISI`s role in politics; the ISI chief has offered himself for a probe by a commission and is ready to resign if parliament so desires; the prime minister deems the resignation unnecessary and members of the treasury have reposed their confidence in our defenders.

This is not all that has come to light from a session that was to be kept under wraps — or was it? It is obvious that some of the parties present wanted a quick surrender to the public of the information being shared inside the house on the historic day. The theme, as it turned out, was to admit there had been major lapses that let Bin Laden and a few stealthy American fliers in, without questioning the sincerity of those responsible and with emphasis on the need for national unity. After the 2008 election, what transpired on Friday corroborated just how dependent on one another all actors in the Pakistani cast are, notwithstanding how big or small their role has been in creating the mess the country finds itself in today. It is suspected that not all of them may have spoken on the day due to one reason or another, but we have a tradition that can only lead to the posing of bolder questions in the future and we have the trends which can be built upon to make the unprecedented exercise that much more meaningful.

It was not the Pakistanis who were suspicious of the intentions of their defenders, and thus sincerity was not an issue inside the house where their representatives sat. The honest mistake having been recognised and the message of national solidarity conveyed far and wide, all we need now is a sincere campaign to set our defences right. Pakistanis must mend these defences immediately.

Communist defeat

THE Left Front`s humiliating rout in West Bengal goes beyond the usual factors of democratic change in India, even though the wafer-thin defeat for the communists in Kerala this week is part of a generally familiar pattern of periodic change. The 238-62 West Bengal verdict against 34 years of unbroken communist rule deserves deep analysis. What can be cursorily gleaned from the rubble of the political tsunami that laid it low are signs that the Communist Party of India-Marxist had lost the plot way back in 2007. That is when its cadres set off an untenable campaign to evict small peasants, mostly Dalits and Muslims, from their tiny landholdings for an industrial hub in Nandigram. Scores were killed and railway minister Mamata Banerjee led the protest against CPI-M atrocities, occasionally with the support of local Maoist groups.

In today`s era of `regime change`, it may help to recall the few times that Indian communists did not commit hara-kiri. They were hounded instead by the country`s pro-business establishments, on occasions with foreign support. They were first evicted from power in Kerala in 1959 two years after an unlikely historic victory in 1957. Communist efforts at land reforms prompted a coalition of Muslim, Christian and Hindu feudal interests to get Jawaharlal Nehru to impose president`s rule. In 1995, after the advent of then finance minister Manmohan Singh`s economic reforms, a widely reported collusion between British and Indian intelligence agents sought to destabilise communist rule in West Bengal. Arms were dropped in Purulia to assist the Anand Marg cult group to trigger anti-communist violence. It was to be a ruse to put the state under New Delhi`s direct rule. The plan failed. More recently, WikiLeaks revealed American ire against the CPI-M, which only increased when the party opposed an India-US civilian nuclear deal. That, however, could not be the reason the CPI-M lost so badly this week. Regime change when effected by a dispossessed people is called democracy. The rusty communist party machinery, increasingly accused of arrogance by its own supporters would do well to understand this.

What sovereignty?

WHO owns Pakistan? Successive administrations have evoked the idea of the country`s sovereignty, loudly decrying perceived transgressions. What is the citizenry to think, then, when it finds that land and assets have been passed into the effective control of foreign powers? On Friday, parliament was informed by the deputy chief of air staff that Balochistan`s Shamsi airbase has been operationally controlled by the UAE since the 1990s. It was from here that the US drones took off. No doubt it was the sheer enormity of the Osama bin Laden debacle that forced the military to make this admission; otherwise, it is unlikely that the citizenry or its representatives would ever have known. The idea of Pakistani soil being leased out to foreign operators is not new. Last August, a senior health ministry official informed a Senate Standing Committee on Health that flood relief operations in Jacobabad were not possible because the only airbase was under use of the Americans. For some time there were suspicions that floodwaters had been diverted to save the Shahbaz airbase. The PAF later reiterated that the airbase was under its control and the few Americans present there were providing technical assistance. Nevertheless, the murkiness remained. Similarly, in 2009, there were reports that the federal investment ministry had given the green signal to the federal food and agriculture ministry to offer Arab countries about one million acres in Sindh on lease for cultivation. This plan reportedly failed on account of the worsening security situation.

Where, then, does that leave the country`s sovereignty? There can be reasonable grounds to put land under the operational use of a foreign power, such as political expediency or earning. If so, the administration ought to take the citizenry into confidence. Shady deals serve no purpose but to raise suspicions. It is important for the administration to clarify its position.