 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partly power play |
THE Indian protest to China calling upon it to cease activities in Azad Jammu and Kashmir comes as a reaction to the Chinese President Hu Jintao’s assurance to Pakistan of help in upgrading the Karakoram Highway and building the Neelum-Jhelum Hydroelectric Project. The first is in Gilgit-Baltistan, formerly called the Northern Areas and the latter in Azad Kashmir. China is helping Pakistan to complete both projects, which are vital for the region as well as for the whole country. The Chinese engineers have completed the survey for the upgradation of the Karakoram Highway, which would cost Rs 30 billion. The improved KKH, built along the historic Silk Route, will serve as a trade corridor with China and the Central Asian Republics, while providing them access to the Arabian Sea. This would give a boost to regional trade besides improving the economic condition of the people of Gilgit-Baltistan. Neelum-Jhelum Hydel Power Project, with a cost of $2.16 billion and an installed capacity of 969 MW, is highly vital for the area, which badly needs enhanced power supply.
The project has been delayed too long, partly on account of neglect and partly due to lack of funds. China is providing a supplier’s credit of $449 million and letters of intent have been issued to a Chinese company to complete the project on a build, operate and transfer basis. Coming as it does at a time of extreme financial crunch, the assistance from China, Pakistan’s all-weather friend, is highly valuable. India, which continues to occupy a large chunk of Kashmir against the wishes of Kashmiris, has no right to object to the development activity in AJK or Gilgit-Baltistan. Pakistan and China successfully demarcated the border between the two countries more than forty years back, not caring for Indian protests. Subsequently, Pakistan built the KKH with China’s help, rejecting India’s objections. New Delhi is well aware of Pakistan’s principled position. The work on both the projects has gone on for quite some time. New Delhi did not demand, in the recent past, that China stop financial and technical assistance for developmental activities in Gilgit-Baltistan or AJK. Why has India become suddenly so sensitive? The last few months have seen an eruption of tension on the 3,500-km long, and largely undefined, Himalayan border between India and China. Beijing has charged that New Delhi is unnecessarily upping the ante to project itself as a counterweight to China and a candidate for US patronage. Among India’s recent grievances is China’s policy of issuing stapled visas rather than normal visas to Kashmiris, which indicates that Beijing considers Kashmir to be a disputed area rather than a part of India.
Indicating India’s displeasure Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has proceeded to Argentina instead of attending the Shanghai Co-operation Organisation summit in Beijing. The Indian protest against China’s assistance for the two projects can, therefore, be interpreted as an expression of the ongoing power play. India is currently preparing to hold elections in three states including Arunachal Pradesh. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to the latter was avowedly meant to bolster the position of the Congress in the elections. Fully aware of Beijing’s reservations, which considers a chunk of the state as part of China, he decided to visit it in the hope that by provoking nationalistic fervour, his party might make some ‘valuable’ gains in the elections. The objection to the Chinese assistance in AJK and Gilgit-Baltistan is also presumably aimed at playing to the gallery. Neither China nor Pakistan is going to be affected by the Indian outbursts. A time-tested friend as it is, China will not only continue to help Pakistan complete the two important projects but also expand co-operation in the multifaceted defence production as a result of the four-day talks that concluded on Thursday between Prime Minister Gilani and the Chinese leadership. Interestingly, India sees no problem in seeking multilateral aid for a project in Arunachal Pradesh. How come? What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander! If there are no qualms about development projects in Arunachal Pradesh, there should be none about such plans in AJK.
|
| |
|
˙ţW a r a n d N o b e l P e a c e |
CONTRIBUTION to peace, more so in an age of war, is hard to judge. It becomes harder still when the world seeks agreement on a contribution that has just begun. The choice of Barack Hussein Obama as the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009, therefore, will necessarily toss around in the choppy waters of world opinion before it finds its moorings in the anchorage of history. That place in history, at once undeniable and indelible, will one day be his without doubt. The Nobel Committee sounded confident of it when it chose to ‘enhance and endorse’ a work in progress on Friday. Obama, at 49, is not the youngest to be bestowed the honour. Aung San Suu Kyi, we remember, was only 46 when she won in 1991. As the 12th acting head of state in the list, he is not even the youngest American: Theodore Roosevelt, who spoke softly and carried a big stick, won it at age 48 in 1906. But none has been seen as having done so much in such little time, and got there. Two years ago, the world hardly knew him. Against all odds, he came to occupy what is regarded as the most powerful station in the world. Nine months into it, he has shown that he is no square peg in the Oval office, and has gone about restoring to it its lost pre-eminence.
Nearly 205 names were considered before the Nobel Committee chose to reward him for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples” for 2009. It acknowledged his vision of a nuclear free world, concern for the environment, and the climate he has created for multilateral diplomacy. “Only very rarely has a person, to the same extent as Obama, captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future.” Indeed, for a man leading a nation at two wars, the honour might seem woefully misplaced at the first blush. But it might help to remember that these are wars he has inherited. Equally, instead, it might help to dwell on the intent he has shown in multi-lateral diplomacy. His efforts to undo the damage of ‘Bushfires’ in the Middle East might not have yielded immediate results, but there is no doubting his unwavering faith in dialogue-over-confrontation, a proclivity that might be proving infectious. Foes in the Arab world have started meeting as friends. On the wider canvas, the United Nations is being seen as a more credible arbiter, thanks to him. Is it too much too soon? The question is bound to come up. Then, again, this is not the first time that the Nobel Committee has chosen to recognise a work in progress. In 1990, when Mikhail Gorbachev was given the prize, the end of the Soviet era was not quite complete. Are we looking at an era of peace here? It will be interesting to see here if the peace prize is followed by more troops to Afghanistan. But let that not spoil the moment for him. He has domestic worries too.
—Khaleej Times
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
