Standing up to India

IN an extraordinary show of unity Pakistan’s political leadership stands behind the government and the armed forces in defence of national security interests. Uniquely and to the great admiration of the people, the heads and representatives of almost all political parties - including those who would not touch the PPP-led government even with a barge pole - got together in Islamabad on Tuesday and unanimously vowed to defend Pakistan’s “honour and dignity as well as its sovereignty, political independence and territorial integrity”. Prime Minister Gilani’s invitation was responded to whole-heartedly by the political leadership across the board, in sharp contrast to his counterpart’s initiative in India where the principal leader of the main opposition party opted out of a similar exercise, adding a new political dimension to the Mumbai incident. Obviously, the seven-point declaration adopted by the conclave at the Prime Minister’s House in Islamabad was a measure of political maturity exhibited by the Pakistani leadership - be it in the parliament or outside of it. Given their widely differing perceptions and ideological perspectives on various national and international issues, the unanimity of their stand vis-à-vis New Delhi’s blow hot and blow cold conduct following the Mumbai tragedy is a source of great satisfaction. Thank you, India. The unity shown by the political leadership at the Gilani-hosted APC was essentially an expression of solidarity with the government in the face of India’s threat emanating from Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s reaction, enthusiastically echoed by the state officials and the Indian media, in the early hours of the Mumbai attacks. It spawned scare all over the place. But as reality sank in and the finger directed at Pakistan started moving, an opinion began emerging that the attacks on India’s commercial hub could very well be the work of home-grown terrorists. Astounding admissions of intelligence failures led to resignations from high offices. The Pakistani side, on the other hand, displayed patience. But there was no cringing to the growling from across the border.
As Pakistan stood its ground that it was not in any way involved in the Mumbai attacks, it expressed its deep sorrow over the wanton killings. Being a frequent victim of suicide-bombings and as an amphitheatre of global war on terrorism the people of Pakistan are sad at the mindless massacre of innocent people, irrespective of their nationalities. Of course, the gathering at the Prime Minister’s House reiterated the nation’s resolve to defend its sovereignty but more pronounced was its unreserved support in hunting out the terrorists involved in the Mumbai carnage. The APC expressed “Pakistan’s desire to pursue its constructive engagement with India in a comprehensive manner with a view to building confidence and mutual trust for establishing friendly and good-neighbourly relations with India on the basis of resolution of all outstanding disputes”. In fact, diplomatic engagement between Islamabad and New Delhi has continued at multiple levels, as Pakistan has asked India to set up a ministerial-level joint investigation commission at the earliest. To a discerning mind, the APC in Islamabad transmits more than one message; it not only brings out the fact of a unified national stand against Indian threats, but also encroaches upon the government’s ‘monopoly’ over foreign policy management, particularly the part of it which deals with Pakistan’s partnership in the US-led war on terror.

Outlawing cluster bombs

THE arsenals available to the modern military contain some horrifically effective weapons with which opposing armies can assault each other. But the cluster bomb has earned itself an infamous reputation. Experience of its use has demonstrated it is not in the main the belligerents who suffer from the exploding bomblets that are scattered far and wide, but civilians who are trying to get on with their lives once the fighting has finished. The toll of killed and maimed innocents from US-supplied, Israeli-dropped cluster bombs during Israel’s defeated 2006 invasion of southern Lebanon has been disgusting. Four million individual bomblets were scattered over the south of Lebanon and half a million of them failed to explode. At least 320 people have been slain or seriously injured by coming into contact with this deadly ordnance. Hardly less tragic has been the fact that there are almost a thousand zones which are still deemed by the UN Mine Action Coordination Center (UNMACC) to be too dangerous for civilians to enter. Farmers are particularly hard hit because they cannot reach their fields and olive and citrus groves. It may still be years before all the bomblets are cleared.
Yesterday in Oslo the first of an expected 107 or more countries signed the Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM), the terms of which were finalized this May in Dublin. The first name was that of Norway, which has led the drive to have, these terrible weapons banned. However, three key players, the United States, Russia and China have refused to sign. These states support the argument that the UN has a better program in the shape of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) that also includes as members India, Pakistan and Israel. The Geneva-based CCW initiative has argued that the CCM confuses and imperils final agreement that should come through the UN. This is, however, to overlook the fact that no less a person than the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon welcomed the finalization of the CCM in Dublin, whose deliberations were, however, boycotted by the United States, Russia and China among others. The reality is that the two initiatives should be seen not as rivals but as complementary to each other. Those states that have chosen to make an upfront commitment to abandon cluster bombs, their manufacture, stockpiling and use via the Norwegian initiative can still play a role in the CCW negotiations. It is less a question of moral high ground than demonstrating that their military can plan for conflict without this weapon. It will then be up to the likes of Washington, Moscow and Beijing to agree that they will in concert abandon cluster bombs, no doubt in a phased program that each state will be able to verify to its own satisfaction. The Americans and Russians with their experience of the 1979 Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT) already know how such mutual arms reduction works. They should now take the lead in persuading others to embark on a process that will rid the world of at least one terrible weapon.

—Arab News