Hashim bin Rashid
Balochistan is more important than a building There is something off when amongst two incidents of terrorism in Balochistan; one in which a building was destroyed, the other in which 25 people, including 15 girl students, were killed, the most grief expressed is for the building. The attack on medical students and a hospital are mentioned only as an afterthought. The building was a 19th century colonial resort in Ziarat that Governor General Muhammad Ali Jinnah chose to live at as he recovered from what would be a fatal tuberculosis infection. The other attack was a suicide bombing of a bus carrying female medical students of the Sardar Bahadur Khan Women’s University, followed by a hostage situation and holdout at the Bolan Medical College. The first attack was claimed by the Baloch Liberation Army, a militia run by Baloch nationalist, attributed to the self-exiled Harbiyar Marri. The second attack was claimed by the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, an anti-Shia militia once considered close to the establishment. When the federal leadership, Interior Minister Ch Nisar Ali Khan and Information Minister Pervaiz Rasheed spoke on the issue, they issued “warning to young Baloch who pick up arms” and condemned the Ziarat attack, without mentioning the LeJ at all. The two subsequently flew to Ziarat, missing the funeral of the Quetta attack victims and failing to visit the site. The visit caught the ire of the Pakthunkhwa Milli Awami Party (PkMAP), a nationalist party that is not known for desiring separation from Pakistan, whose general secretary suggested that the “ministers should have instead attended the funeral of the victims of Saturday’s attacks in Quetta claimed by the banned sectarian extremist group Lashkar-e-Jhangvi”. What makes a so-called national symbol more important than real citizens who die at the hands of a sectarian group? Commenting on the PkMAP leader’s words, a report in a national English daily began with the words: “While the entire nation is in a state of shock over the destruction of Jinnah’s Residency in Ziarat, a key coalition partner in the Balochistan government calls it a ‘symbol of slavery.’” The logic implied is that the PKMaP leadership and its position on the Ziarat Residency falls outside what the “entire nation” is supposed to believe. The PkMAP General Secretary Akram Shah had continued to make a fairly clear remark: “The wooden house at Ziarat was a symbol of slavery as it was built for the colonial British officer Sir Robert Groves Sandeman who ruled Balochistan until his death in 1892. The house always reminded the Baloch and Pashtuns of the long period when they were the slaves of British Empire in Indian subcontinent. For us, it’s no more than the house of the then agent to the Governor General [of India], Sir Sandeman.” Should the PkMAP general secretary’s words be taken with a pinch of salt or should they be taken seriously? In order to do so, we need to look at the history of the Ziarat Regency. Originally built in 1892, the Ziarat Residency became home to the British Governor-General’s Agent to Balochistan Sir Robert Groves Sandeman. Sandeman, whom no one chooses to remember was responsible for the British colonial policy of dealing with Balochistan. Based on dividing Balochistan into the Khan of Kalat’s territory and the tribal territories, Balochistan was denied the status of a full province. A treaty was negotiated with the Khan of Kalat which laid down the relationship of Balochistan to the centre. The policy was maintained almost de facto by the Pakistani state after partition. Maintaining the divide between ‘civilised’ citizens and ‘uncivilised’ citizens, Balochistan continued to be ruled by an agent of the Pakistan government until it was finally declared a province in 1970. It must be recalled that Baloch nationalist history recalls that 1948, the year Jinnah passed his last days at the residency, was also the year in which Jinnah reportedly ordered an army operation to “force Balochistan to cede to Pakistan”. If it be remembered, the Ziarat Residency was not even a declared heritage site before 1975. It was only when Zulfikar Ali Bhutto had dismissed the National Awami Party (NAP) government in Balochistan and the Pakistan Army launched another military operation against the third Baloch insurgency that the Pakistani State remembered the Ziarat Regency and re-titled it the Quaid-e-Azam Residency. By declaring the Ziarat Residency a “national heritage site”, the state “marked” the territory with its identity, and put a claim on a two-month period in the history of the Residency. What the Ziarat Residency signified to the many different peoples that inhabit Pakistan remained contested. This is why the Residency was bombed. The bombing itself did not have a tangible target. The message delivered by the BLA was ‘symbolic’. In the press release that followed, the BLA called upon “their Pashtun brothers to build a monument in tribute to Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan and Abdul Samad Achakzai”. It also said that the bombing was representative of their position on the “talks” proposed under the National Party Chief Minister Dr Abdul Malik. Much of the romance around the Ziarat Residency reeks of continuing colonial attitudes. Articles and news features in tribute to the building have spoken of how “it was a hill station surrounded by juniper trees”. The “fresh air” and “greenery” are said to be its main charms. But somehow the fact that it was the seat at which Balochistan’s first coloniser, the British, exercised their power was ignored. Another article cites, “For those living in other provinces, the residency was nothing short of an emblem of Balochistan itself. This was not just confined to a sentimental association with the country’s founder, but the residency’s image also adorns Rs100 notes, making it part of everyday life in Pakistan.” Is this description not the problem in itself? The fact that our relationship to Balochistan be mediated through a building instead of a real and equal relationship with the Baloch people is the problem. Should the government’s response to the attack not have been to insist upon creating a functional and equal relationship with the Baloch people, instead of insisting that the Ziarat Residency will be rebuilt within three months? ‘Heritage’ is always a contested issue. Historian Benedict Anderson’s old adage that “nations are imagined communities” requires repetition. Because national heritage is something that the state tries to impose on people, some (significant) groups continue to contest it. This contestation is fairly obvious in Pakistan. Statements by the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leadership insisting that the “PkMAP general secretary had offended the millions of patriotic Baloch” are quite meaningless. The so-called trust of the Baloch in the Pakistani state can be determined from the low turnout in the 2013 General Elections. The percentage of votes cast in six Baloch districts remained below 15 percent. That the PkMAP actually won the NA seat from Ziarat and still felt it necessary not to condemn the Ziarat Residency attack requires contemplation in this context. Moreover, if the same sentiments of ‘national heritage’ are to be consistently employed, then much more tears need to be shed regarding the over 2,000-year-old Hinglaj Temples, threatened not by Baloch nationalists, but the Hingol Dam being constructed by the Pakistan government against local opposition which calls on it to “preserve heritage and ecology”. Heritage formation is selective and exclusive: the state handpicks “heritage symbols” which affirm the nationalist historical narrative. The question is: where and how do we form our opinion about an event from? Personally, I do not see much tactical or symbolic purpose gained from the BLA attack on the Ziarat Residency. But the question is whether I mourn the loss of the building more than I mourn the situation in Balochistan? That Jinnah stayed at a certain location does not make it sacred. If so there are a few apartments in London and Bombay that the Pakistani state needs to declare ‘national heritage’ too. This is not the point. Rather it is that the discourse around the two attacks shows the skewed vision with which we look at events. The Quetta attack shows once again that Balochistan is burning, but it is only the burning of the Ziarat Regency that most of the media and national politicians chose to care about, even trying to suggest that both attacks were by the BLA, despite the LeJ admission. The bombing of the residency at Ziarat is not the biggest issue in Balochistan. One must speak about missing persons, the ‘kill-and-dump’ and elections held under military occupation before one begins to speak about a destroyed building. Living people must take precedence over buildings. If not Balochistan will continue to burn as we spend all our energies trying to reconstruct the Ziarat Regency “exactly as it was before”. The writer is the general secretary (Lahore) of the Awami Workers Party. He is a journalist and a researcher. Contact: hashimbrashid@gmail.com

Robert A Manning
Obama and Xi outline core interests and explore the limits of what’s possible It will be some time before the full consequences of the California summit meeting between US President Barack Obama and China’s new leader, Xi Jinping, are revealed. Nixon-Mao it was not. Nevertheless, the well-timed and much-needed unscripted discussion focused on fundamental questions about the US-China relationship which has reached a new level of tension because of mutual distrust and suspicion. Xi rightly observed during a preparatory meeting with senior US officials that the US-China relationship, arguably the most important bilateral relationship in the world, is at a “critical juncture.” But based on the eight hours of meetings, the “new model of relations” which both leaders pledged to create remains a largely aspirational goal. On the explosive issue of cybersecurity, especially the cybertheft of US intellectual property, the summit’s achievement was to stress to Xi the priority of the issue, and as outgoing US National Security Advisor Tom Donilon told reporters, place it “at the center of the relationship.” In what may prove the most notable outcome of the meeting, Washington and Beijing appeared to move closer on North Korea, agreeing that neither would accept a nuclear North Korea. Beijing is the chief provider of energy and food to the North. Prior to Pyongyang’s third nuclear test in February, China has appeared to place stability on the Korean Peninsula above the nuclear issue. The Obama-Xi summit may have established a basis for closer coordination in managing the nuclear problem and perhaps the eventual reunification of Korea as well. If so, such cooperation may help melt the underlying mutual distrust that permeates the relationship. For Beijing, there is fear that the US posture in Asia is designed to “contain” a rising China; for the US, a fear that China seeks to deny the US a preponderant role in the Pacific, there is little evidence that the summit has put the relationship on a more positive path. Since 1972, eight presidents, from Richard Nixon to Obama, have pursued a remarkably consistent policy toward China, cooperating where possible and seeking to manage differences. But the relationship may be at a tipping point: The current bilateral relationship as presently constituted is no longer sustainable. Over the course of this decade it will almost certainly either tilt toward being more cooperative or more competitive, toward more collaborative efforts to address global problems and manage regional security in the Pacific or toward confrontation. The direction it drifts toward will go a long way to determining the future shape of the global system. Can new equilibrium in US-China relations, what Xi calls “a new type of relationship between major countries in the 21st century,” be attained? Shirtsleeves, schmoozing and long walks can help create familiarity between leaders that could prove helpful in a crisis. Better communication at the top can minimize misunderstandings. But at the end of the day, it is interests and to some extent values, not personalities, that shape a relationship. The world’s two largest economies, the world’s largest creditor and its largest debtor, the two largest energy consumers and Pacific powers, are deeply intertwined. Yet tensions over cybersecurity, trade, currency manipulation, China’s assertive behavior toward territorial disputes in East Asia and, not least, differences in values between a democracy and an authoritarian one-party state have steadily deepened mutual distrust and suspicion. It is not, as Obama has rightly pointed out, that a rising power like China and an established power like the US are destined to clash, like Athens and Sparta in ancient times or Britain and Germany a century ago. After all, no country has benefited more from integrating itself into the US-led global system over the past 35 years than China. Since 1980 China’s economy has grown from $202.5 billion to roughly $7 trillion. Despite complaints about playing by rules of the international economic and political system that it did not write, China has been a major beneficiary. Much as it derides the US security alliances in East Asia, the US security guarantor role has provided the stability under which China has prospered. At bottom, there is a mismatch in perceptions, which if not altered could overwhelm the relationship. For example, the Chinese blame the so-called “rebalancing” by the US for rising tensions in East Asia. The view of China’s leaders is through the prism of a victim narrative reflecting an era past. Thus, rather than US Asia policy being one largely of continuity – enhancing alliances and security partnerships, deepening economic and diplomatic engagement – Beijing sees a US decision to contain China. Even the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the nascent trade accord which China theoretically could join, is viewed as an effort to isolate China. “The Obama administration’s rebalancing toward Asia has to be singled out as a cataclysmic strategic move,” wrote Minghao Zhao, an analyst at a think tank of the International Department of the Chinese Communist Party Central Committee. Rather than seeing that nations from India to Vietnam are looking to the US as a counterweight to a China asserting an ever larger footprint in the Asia-Pacific, Beijing is confusing US offshore balancing with containment. For its part, the US focuses on cyberattacks, China’s self-proclaimed efforts to become a maritime power build a modernized nuclear arsenal, and its nearly two decades of double-digit growth in defense spending. Beijing’s assertive posture in the East and South China seas are raising questions about China’s intentions. Current reality is a kind of mirror-imaging, with the military-industrial complexes in both Washington and Beijing driving a strategic competition cycle of action-reaction. The Pentagon fears China is pursuing an anti-access strategy to curb the US role in the Pacific; the People’s Liberation Army fears the US seeks to contain China and deny Beijing its rightful role as a dominant actor in the Pacific. Both sides must get past this. A new type of relationship requires Washington and Beijing to find a balance of interests. Each must come to terms with how the other treats its core interests. The problem is that Beijing views its “core interests” in 19th-century terms – territory, boundaries, sovereignty, while Washington’s core interests are focused on unimpeded access to the global commons – freedom of navigation on land, sea and cyberspace. Thus, Beijing complains about US arms sales to Taiwan or visits by the Dali Lama while Washington is concerned about anti-access to US naval forces in the Pacific, cyberspace violations and anti-satellite efforts. Reaching new understandings on respective core interests is a central challenge. The current centerpiece of the US-China relationship, the Strategic and Economic Dialogue, has become too large and unwieldy, too much a “check the box” exercise. The Obama-Xi summit was necessary to reinvigorate the relationship. Both leaders would do well to define a new type of relationship by giving priority to a few key issues that can redefine the relationship: developing rules and a code of conduct for cyberspace; agreeing on the respective US and Chinese security postures in East Asia; and demonstrating real cooperation on a big strategic issue such as North Korea. The writer is a senior fellow of the Brent Scowcroft Center for International Security at the Atlantic Council. He served as a senior counselor to the US Under-Secretary of State for Global Affairs from 2001 to 2004 and a member of the US Department of State Policy Planning Staff from 2004 to 2008.

Malik Muhammad Ashraf
Best possible under the prevailing circumstances Preparing a budget and selling it to the public is the most arduous undertaking even in the most affluent and developed countries, particularly the new tax proposals and measures aimed at keeping the corporate sector in good stead to spur economic growth and employment situation in the country. Taxes besides generating the much needed revenue for the government to spend on development of the country and well being of the masses also affect the people one way or the other, affecting their economic situation which makes them the most unpopular proposition, notwithstanding the fact that they are inevitable for resource generation. So every segment of the society tries to look at the budget from its own perspective; resultantly there is always a mixed reaction on the budgets presented by the governments. The exercise is even more excruciating in the third world countries like Pakistan, facing financial constraints and dismal economic situations. Therefore, not surprisingly the budget for 2013-14 presented by the PML-N government has spurred a debate with regard to whom it benefits and whom it hurts. The debate however lacks objectivity and relevance to the ground realities. Needless, to emphasize that the budget has been presented in the backdrop of economy perched at the edge of a precipice with fiscal deficit at 8.8 per cent of the GDP, a whopping internal debt of Rs14 trillion, a circular debt of Rs500 billion and acute energy crisis which has already pushed the GDP growth rate downwards by two per cent. The situation therefore demanded some hard decisions keeping in view the long term economic health of the economy. The foremost concern was to reduce the fiscal deficit through internal resource generation by broadening the tax base and reduction in the non-developmental expenditure. The revival of the corporate sector through concession and incentives was also an utmost necessity, as was the need to attract foreign investment, particularly in the energy sector, that would not only help the country through export-led growth but also improve employment situation in the country. Honestly speaking, the budget proposals aim exactly at what is dictated by the economic ground realities. Bringing nearly 500,000 more people into the tax net through multiple policy initiatives and resort to indirect taxation like GST, Sales tax and different levies was the only option available to immediately raise the level of government revenue that will generate additional Rs.209 billion and help in bringing down the fiscal deficit to the envisaged 6.3 per cent of GDP from the current 8.8 per cent. This is further to be reduced to four per cent by the year 2016. The government has also reduced its own expenditure by 30 per cent as well as abolishing all discretionary funds at the disposal of different ministries – a net saving of Rs40 billion. These initiatives will ensure that the target of revenue collections of Rs2,475 billion for the current budget is easily achieved. However a conscious effort has been made to shift the emphasis on direct taxation in the long term. These measures were essentially required to be taken to dilute the hurt being caused by the hydra-headed budget deficit and also to enhance our ability to negotiate a new loan with the IMF to cover the budge deficit besides exploring other avenues from abroad. Granted that some of the taxes on consumer items might affect certain sections in the short run but their impact is likely to be diluted by some other measures incorporated in the budget like, the continuation of the income support programme, Qarz-e-Hasna scheme, training programme for educated youth to enhance their employability with a stipend of Rs10,000 and the initiative to advance loans to youth on soft terms to start their own businesses which will surely benefit a large segment of the society through their multiplier effect. The enhancement of pensions by 10 per cent is also likely to provide relief to millions of families. Reviving the confidence of the corporate sector through some concessions and incentives was also needed to enable it to play its role in ensuring export-led growth in the country besides producing substitute products for imported items and improving the employment situation in the country. The government therefore has rightly enhanced the period of tax holiday in the exports processing zones from five years to 10 years – the reason why some critics of the budget are calling it a corporate-friendly budget. The government despite the financial crunch has not lost sight of the developmental needs of the country and has allocated Rs1155 billion for the PSDP out of which Rs540 billion will be spent on federally administered projects and Rs615 billion will be at the disposal of the provincial governments. This allocation represents 32 per cent increase over the previous year. The emphasis is on projects in energy and water sector. The budget also envisages 23 per cent increase in the share of the provinces from the federal divisible pool. The government has also committed to pay off the circular debt of Rs500 billion within sixty days and in this regard Rs25 billion will be paid during the current month, which indicates the priority that the present government is giving to the energy crisis. The tiding over the energy crisis will surely reinvigorate the domestic industrial sector which has suffered badly during the last five years and millions who lost their jobs due to this debilitating development would be back at work besides creation of new employment avenues. Much will depend on the ability of the government not only to enhance power production in the short run by paying off the circular debt but also to find sufficient resources for investing in the energy sector through internal or foreign sources to cater for the future energy needs which are increasing by 8 per cent annually. According to an IAEA report, Pakistan will need nearly 49,078 MW of electricity by2025, which means that we will have to double our power generating capacity within the next 12 years. Huge resources are therefore required to meet our energy needs as well as reviving the economy to ensure a sustained growth process in the country. We will have to move towards self-reliance gradually. It will inevitably entail some tough decision divorced from political considerations. The government has shown a great courage in taking the right decisions in conformity with the dictates of the ground realities. The budget proposals for the year 2013-14 present the best possible solutions to our economic woes under the prevailing circumstances.

anjum

This week, Microsoft rubber-stamped Windows 8 as good to go for manufacturers. This means PC makers and other partners can grab the operating system code and test it out with their products, which should start arriving Oct. 26. The struggle for the future of computing as we know it has essentially commenced.

Microsoft has essentially opened a window in having media and technology start anew with their new operating system. As they have minted a lot of money through Windows Vista, and through Windows 7, who says that they won't do the same now?

Howevever, what one really needs to see is a resurgence of the Personal Computer industry, to battle smartphones and tablets in the ever-growing information technology market. Windows unsuccesful bid to bring forth a popular Tablet PC for their customers brought an opportunity for Apple to establish its brand through the iPad. Early smartphones in the form of handheld palmtops such as the HP Jornada have given Google an edge in bringing forth Android phones with more advanced operating systems.

So it essentially comes down to this: with Windows 8, we get to find out what the non-Apple computing industry really has left.

Windows needs some resurgence to its already established brand, as the bringer of Personal Computers during in an information technology hike in the 80's, 90's, and 00's. It really needs to get the ball rolling and not leave companies like Dell, Hewlett-Packard, or Acer sitting idly by while others get ahead in the game.

Just about everyone—even Apple fans—should hope that some company gets its act together, takes some risks, and wows the public on the back of Windows 8. It’s the sort of competition the industry needs to be healthy and for innovation to continue at a furious clip.

Sakina Husain
It has been about a month since the IMF report on Pakistan ‘ingeniously’ highlighted the economy’s fragility. A sense of urgency was incumbent; the PM quickly and quite conveniently replaced the secretaries of finance and FBR. Very few questions were asked; the damage was covered. How and why would the public demand accountability and transparency, or an extenuating correction of seemingly portrayed fudged figures when it has been residing in blissful ignorance with regard to the economy? Or maybe the silence was another extension of the disillusionment with the system. For the purpose of reminiscing, the IMF report in Feb-12 revealed that the (please note: expected) budget deficit communicated by the government for FY12 has been understated by Rs532 billion where in the revenue was overstated by Rs215 billion and expenditures were understated by Rs317 billion. This would imply that the budget deficit for the current fiscal year would arrive at about 6.6 per cent of GDP, instead of the government’s repeated assurances about realising the promised five per cent contingent on promised external inflows which even the sovereign would vouch by…but nevertheless. Given this back drop, the very act of changing secretaries signals that the government is capable of making only cosmetic changes in an effort to please the almighty IMF. The first contention questions why the IMF is so important that the government needs to replace qualified personnel who have served its cause throughout the regime so far. Moreover, current deliberations by the ex-finance minister reveal that domestic debt has exceeded foreign debt, indicative of greater reliance on the domestic financial system instead of lenders abroad. So why is there a need to prove credibility in front of this iffy source of funds? The second contention challenges the autonomy of the ministry of finance as the government’s window into its accounts. If expenditures, especially the larger recurrent ones are being exceeded than the target, is the finance ministry really supposed to suffer blame? There are severe structural deficiencies in the collection and distribution of revenues between the federal and the provincial governments. For instance, the provincial government or the chief minister has the power to undertake expenditures without taking prior approval from the national assembly. This automatically results in a greater than expected deficit in provincial budgets as the latter have limited space to raise revenues, especially, post the 18th amendment which led to the devolution of many subjects that were earlier apart of the federal list. Third, the PM’s alacrity in reading international evaluations of the economy is commendable and therefore must be lauded. Why should he pay heed to weekly caveats published by domestic analysts who have repeatedly tried to inform, challenge or at least warn the government regarding the same macro variables delineated by the IMF? The government is ready to cheer the FBR chairman when he reports higher than target revenue collection, but ever ready to replace the same person when the numbers are challenged by an international body! Why are there no internal checks and balances? And moreover, is the 2-3membered IMF office in Pakistan better equipped to report federal collection of taxes and expenditures? Regardless of whether the answer is in the affirmative, there is only a sense of embarrassment and shame that holds its ground. If the government is ever so concerned about accurate reporting of its accounts and more importantly meeting its target spending, ‘may be’ it needs to address the inefficiencies that exist in its very own government offices. Supposedly, for the provision of government services annually, the government spends about Rs13,000 per capita, leaving out the amount that is assigned for expanding the scope of these services ie the PSDP. And to put an end note: there is little education, very little health and almost no security in the country. The writer is an economic analyst and freelance financial journalist. She can be reached at sakina.husain@gmail.com

Javed Gilani
an economy unable to reach its production possibility frontier will always remain vulnerable to exogenous shocks, as in the case of Pakistan. It would have been a different story if the last two-to-three years had seen some sort of visible improvement in handling deficits and improving growth. If we had produced, exported and grown more, we would have had a more stable support base, restricting damage from external shocks our economic and political managers have no control over. In the present circumstances, among Pakistan’s chief worries is rising energy and input cost, the demand-supply dynamics of which play out on a stage and involve actors far removed from Islamabad’s sphere of influence. With our deficits in uncomfortable zones, additional price pressure due to increasing inflation, predominantly higher energy and input costs, is putting unsustainable pressure on the country’s reserve situation. Therefore, even as relevant quarters and analysts calculate a few month elbow room for reserves, their value diminishes every time international pressures bid up oil. Things looked up in the immediate aftermath of the 18th amendment, which transferred increased power and responsibility to provincial governments. Yet with no proper revenue generation framework, and unable to get help from a largely defunct FBR, they have been unable to make any meaningful contribution so far. On the other hand, the federal machinery has not been able to introduce any form of value addition in the present export basket. This means that almost all traditional means of generating national revenue are compromised. That is why we rely on international trends to facilitate our economic engine. We are always in need of improved remittances to defend deficits. We are always praying for international events that push down the price of oil so our own economic managers can breathe easy. And of course, we are always on the lookout of bailout and donor assistance. Sadly, despite the obvious persistence of such trends, we have not moved in manner that the situation merits. It bears noting that persistent growth problems require solvency in credit markets to stimulate the only indigenous option to revive GDP. When the external situation exerts unbearable pressure, economies look inward, prompting private sector expansion which in turn attracts offshore investment. In this case, banks facilitate private sector investment, in some cases ably guided by the official machinery, in a way that the centre does not interfere in market mechanism, only facilitates it. This is where the Pakistani banking sector needs to step up to the plate. For some years now, a proactive lending regime, one that incorporates targeted needs of the time, has been conspicuous by its absence. Whatever little scope the private sector has had has been compromised by heavy government borrowing. This equation requires urgent balancing. The last couple of years of private sector crowding out have left a vast investment field yet to be exploited. Ironically, the laxity of the past might even turn into an attractive opportunity for the present. If properly handled, private sector investment can create jobs, improve infrastructure, create employment and, most importantly, engineer second round market multiplier, with gains for all. We have now come to the point of no return. Both government and autonomous organs must finalise an action plan that will stimulate employment and growth. That means fine tuning both fiscal and monetary policies. Once the finance ministry initiates immaculately targeted fiscal expansion, and the central bank makes credit available to private investors, we may even see a domino effect strong enough to lure bulky foreign investors. Our problems are not existential, but their handling has made them acute. We have the necessary inputs, its just a little toggling of official policy that is required. The recent stock market optimism is an adequate indicator of productive potential across the economy. All that is needed is effective program management. The writer is Chief Manager SME bank and has been a leading banker in the industry for more than 30 years

Pakistan Today
Mr Khurshid Shah of Pakistan People’s Party has proudly announced that Kalabagh dam is buried for good. In fact what he has announced is burial of Pakistan People’s Party. History has proved that whoever opposed Kalabagh dam that was a lifeline to Pakistan met a disastrous end. As such Mr. Khurshid Shah ought to beware the terrible end of all leaders who buried Kalabagh dam. Pakistan People’s Party leaders should have some sense not to repeatedly bury the Kalabagh dam which like cream in the milk always comes at the top the more you blow. The 12-16 hours of load shedding gifted to people by Pakistan People’s Party in its last stint of five years would be enough to doom the hackneyed slogans of Pakistan People’s Party in the face of darkness engulfing the nation due to lack of hydel power thanks to obstinate opposition to Kalabagh dam by Pakistan People’s Party. DR M YAQOOB BHATTI Lahore

Pakistan Today
I vividly remember that every city, town and village in my home province Sindh was covered in fascinating and ancient trees and plants that added to the mystery and appeal of the province. Unfortunately, nowadays those trees have either been cut by the timber mafia in connivance with the corrupt to the core forest, revenue, irrigation, police department officers or those have died up. Since the lakes, springs and streams have already dried up across the province, thus, there is no water to save these plants and tress in the province. However, the concerned departments are requested to take pragmatic steps including proper water arrangement for plants and trees, to save plant, flora and fauna in the province. HASHIM ABRO Islamabad

Pakistan Today
According to the recent news reports, Pepco officials run the grid station feeders according to the publicly declared load-shedding schedules, but further down the line its subdivisions carry out massive additional closures of lines at will which constitutes unscheduled load shedding. This is done to save electricity in order to meet the line losses targets set by the Pepco headquarters. The result is that in some areas of Muzaffargarh electricity is made available only for 6 hours a day. For example on Alipur Road Muzaffargarh there is an officers’ colony where all the powerful government officers reside but hardly pay any bills. So a terrible amount of unscheduled closures is carried out here. This does not affect those high officials because they have alternative generators, but the poor people of the area suffer heavily. Now this really proves that might is always right. ZEESHAN ALI Muzaffargarh City

Pakistan Today
KP, Punjab focus on development, Sindh on patronage Three provincial governments announced their budgets on Monday. Provincial governments run by Punjab, Sindh and Khyber Pakthunkhwa (KP) governments, each run by a different political party were announced. Some would suggest that it was the first time that the difference in mandate and manifesto came out strongly: the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) with its governance and social service focused manifesto in KP, the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) in Punjab with its focus on grand projects and austerity, and the Pakistan People Pakistan’s (PPP) in Sindh with more patronage projects on offer. The difference between the total budgets in each province is stark and dependent upon the economic strength of them. Punjab announced the largest provincial budget of Rs871 billion. Sindh’s provincial budget laid out an outlay of Rs 617 billion while KP’s budget was Rs344 billion. A lot of eyes and ears were focusing on the PTI, which is in government the first time, and according to some observers the budget is the first “KP budget with a clear economic programme.” In comparison to the KP Finance Minister Sirajul Haq’s budget speech, the Awami National Party used the budget speech to blame the province’s problems on Islamabad and then merely recited the budget numbers. Haq, however, set out the PTI’s policy priorities, connected them to the budget number and spoke of how these policies would bear fruit. Apart from imposing a one percent tax on Afghan transit trade, no new tax was announced. The formation of a tax authority, already in place in Sindh and Punjab, was announced while a Rescue 1122 service would also be established. Rs22billion and Rs67billion were allocated for health and education respectively, while an education emergency was announced with the formation of an Education Advisory Commission is on the cards. How this would work out with the Jamaat-i-Islami (JI) in coalition and most of the province’s education shifted to madrassas is a question that will need answering. Punjab’s Rs26 billion deficit budget imposes taxes on the rich, especially on the luxury immoveable property (houses) in urban areas, fashion and music shows, horse racing and circus. Allocating eight per cent apiece to agriculture and infrastructure respectively, the Punjab government has chosen to let the federal government handle the electricity crisis. In Sindh, however, around 40 per cent of the development budget was taken up by discretionary grants. That is sticking to the trodden path of doling out patronage to the select few. Some new taxes have however been imposed as well as practices to make the Sindh Taxation Authority more effective, however, the GST rate was kept at 16 percent. The common features amongst the budgets were that minimum pay was increased from Rs9,000 to Rs10,000 per month. However, implementation will remain a key concern. With Punjab not following KP and Sindh’s 15 per cent increase in government salaries, some protests have been seen in the province. Three different forms of governance have emerged. It remains to be seen which will succeed.

Pakistan Today
On the issue of peace in the country The two terrorist attacks in Balochistan were not the first of their kind in the province. There was however a new government in the province led by a nationalist leader and another one at the centre under the PML-N. Both were committed to put an end to extremism and militancy. Their claims had inspired hopes that henceforth serious and meaningful steps would be taken to bring peace to Balochistan and the rest of the country. The matter this time has therefore gone beyond routine condemnation. Questions have been raised in both the houses of parliament about the apparent civil military disconnect, and government control, or rather lack of it, over intelligence and law enforcement agencies. Speaking at the floor of the house in the National Assembly, Mahmood Khan Achakzai underlined in strong words the need to rein in the establishment, which he held responsible for patronizing the militants. In the Senate, members of the house both from the treasury and opposition benches unanimously demanded parliamentary control over agencies without which, they maintained, peace could not be restored in the country. In his briefing to the Senate, federal interior minister Ch Nisar Ali Khan told the house that Saturday’s terrorist attacks on the Ziarat Residency and Bolan Medical Complex were the result of “serious security lapses” and “lack of coordination” between security and law enforcement agencies. He admitted that terrorists had managed to transport a huge quantity of explosives and arms in vehicles passing through a number of check-posts manned by the police, FC and even army personnel both in Ziarat and Quetta. That despite such deployments the terrorists managed to carry out attacks raises serious questions. The security establishment needs to pay heed to the speeches in the Senate where speaker after speaker demanded an end to the prevailing civil military disconnect over extremism and militancy. It was maintained by the senators irrespective of their political affiliations that there was a need to bring the operation of the agencies under the ambit of legislation to be able to address the issue of terrorism, forced disappearances, weak response and lack of coordination between different organs of the setup. Unless the security establishment puts its act together it would be under increasing pressure in the days to come. While in democracies, civilian control over the security network is established through proper legislation and better working of the parliamentary committees, the interior ministry too needs to improve its functioning to be able to rein in the law enforcement agencies.

Pakistan Today
PML-N government’s promise of rebuilding economy is linked with tackling terrorism Terrorism has played havoc with business and industry during the last few years. Businessmen have either been forced to pay protection money or kidnapped for ransom. Bank heists have been committed by militants to raise funds for their activities. They have bombed business centers, mosques, shrines and schools, targeted law enforcement personnel and security installations, crating a perception that Pakistan was a soft state. This has led a number of countries and international bodies to discourage foreign nationals from traveling to Pakistan. The feeling of uncertainty created by terrorist attacks has led a number of Pakistani entrepreneurs to shift their businesses abroad. Meanwhile the rate of foreign direct investments has shrunk over the years. From the 20007-08 peak of RS 5,409m the FDI has come down year after year to reach a nadir of Rs853.5 million in 2012-13 (July-April). Unending acts of terrorism, rise in crime and shutter down cum wheel jam strikes in response to terrorist attacks have led to flight of capital from Karachi to Dubai, Bangladesh, Malaysia and some western countries. Hopes that there would be a respite to terrorist attacks after the new elections have turned out to be unfounded. Since take over by the new government a number of terrorist attacks have rocked KP, Balochistan and Karachi. In KP at least two policemen have been killed and a High School blown up. In Swabi, two volunteers in the anti polio campaign were shot. In Miranshah, militants killed three security personnel. Meanwhile troops fighting insurgency in Tirah valley lost a Lt Colonel. In Balochistan, LeJ claimed bombing a bus carrying girl students and teachers and later attacking the hospital where the wounded were taken, raising the toll of those killed to 25. Earlier, the BLA had claimed destroying the historic Ziarat Regency. A day later armed militants killed three soldiers in Killa Saifullah area. In Mastung, gunmen kidnapped 3 more. In Karachi, three security guards were wounded in an attack by unknown motorcyclists. The PML-N government is concentrated on turning round the economy. While these efforts are commendable the government has to realize that eliminating militancy is as important, if not more so, to resuscitate the economy. It is disconcerting to note that the government has not yet devised any policy to eradicate terrorism beyond a vague reiteration of desire for talks with the militants. The spokesman of the TTP on the other hand has clarified that there is no possibility of talks for the time being. This reduces the government’s space to maneouvre. Meanwhile, a newspaper report tells of several businessmen in and around Islamabad having been issued notices by the TTP to pay millions of dollars worth of protection money or face consequences. There is a dire need on the part of the PML-N government to move apace to resolve the issue of extremism and militancy.