NY Times: Iran Reacts to Pressure From America

Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, promised on Sunday that Iran would deliver “an unforgettable response” to any “improper actions” from the United States over an alleged Iranian plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to the United States.

The ayatollah appeared to be responding to an American campaign to further isolate and pressure Iran, an effort that received a push on Sunday with reports that President Obama is pressing United Nations nuclear inspectors to release classified data showing that Iran is working on nuclear weapons.

The United States accused Iranian officials last week of plotting to murder the ambassador in a bizarre scheme involving an Iranian-American used car salesman who believed he was hiring assassins from a Mexican drug cartel for $1.5 million. Two men — the Iranian-American,Mansour J. Arbabsiar, and an officer in the Quds Force, part of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps — have been charged in the plot.

Iran’s leaders have called the case a fabrication meant to distract Americans from their own problems, and The Associated Press reported Sunday that Iranian state TV had said that Iran’s Foreign Ministry requested consular access to Mr. Arbabsiar.

Norbert Bärlocher, a spokesman for the Swiss Embassy in Washington, said the embassy had no knowledge of whether the Iranians had passed such a request to the Swiss government. He said, “We represent the U.S. in Iran, but we do not represent Iran in the U.S.”

Asked if she knew of any request to see Mr. Arbabsiar, his lawyer, Sabrina Shroff, said, “I have no such knowledge.”

The supreme leader’s comments on Sunday were his strongest yet about the case.

“If any American officials entertain delusions, they should know that any improper action, whether political or security related, will meet a decisive response from the Iranian nation,” Ayatollah Khamenei said, while speaking to university professors and students in Kermanshah Province in western Iran.

The ayatollah said that the United States was using the accusations to divert attention from its financial problems, suggesting that the protests over economic injustice sweeping the globe were an embarrassment to Washington. He said that “the people of at least 80 nations have expressed support for the Occupy Wall Street movement, and this is very bitter and difficult for American officials to accept.”

Iran’s president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, also weighed in on Sunday, saying the alleged plot is just another of Washington’s “scenarios.” The semiofficial Press TV reported Mr. Ahmadinejad as saying that the United States makes “daily efforts to conceive scenarios against Iran. And, in this instance, it accused Iran of terrorism, but it should be clarified for the Americans that terror is the work of those that have no culture.”

Ayatollah Khamenei, according to Mehr News and IRNA, semiofficial news agencies, also issued a veiled threat to Mr. Ahmadinejad not to overstep his boundaries, addressing a power struggle between the two that has been going on most of this year. The ayatollah said, “Changing Iran into a parliamentary system from a presidential system” someday would not be a problem.

The news agencies focused on this comment. The implication, analysts said, was that Ayatollah Khamenei, the nation’s ultimate authority, was warning Mr. Ahmadinejad that he could abolish the presidency in the future.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/17/world/middleeast/iran-warns-america-against-trying-to-pressure-it.html?_r=1&src=tp

The Economist: Post-revolutionary Tunisia – Moving Ahead

Frustration and uncertainty persist, but the country is heading the right way

 

COMPARED with the other upheavals across the Arab world this year, Tunisia’s is still the runaway winner. Since the country’s dictator, Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali, with his greedy wife, Leila Trabelsi, flew off into a Saudi twilight on January 14th after a nationwide uprising that lasted barely a month, there have been political hiccups, sit-ins, strikes and riots, especially in the fly-blown towns of the interior, and several new governments. But under Beji Caid Sebsi, an avuncular 84-year-old who first served in a cabinet in the 1960s and took over as prime minister on February 27th, Tunisia has calmed down. “People think things are going better than they thought they would the day after the revolution,” says a diplomat.

The postponement until October 23rd of an election to a constituent assembly originally scheduled for July 24th was widely accepted with good grace after the independent electoral commission said it could not prepare properly in time. The country has a clear path ahead. The assembly, once elected, is expected to draw up a constitution within a year, perhaps even sooner, paving the way for a full-blown election. Tunisia is in with a good chance of having a decent democracy and a perky economy by the end of next year.

Its transitional government has a clutch of competent technocrats in key positions, several of whom worked abroad for many years in Western banks but were lured back by the call of patriotism. “Tunisia could be an amazing place,” says Jalloul Ayed, the finance minister, a former Citibank man and composer of classical symphonies. “We have a bright, highly educated population. We’re close to Europe’s markets. We have the right to dream of Tunisia as the Singapore of the Mediterranean. We could achieve it in five to seven years—with a few adjustments.”

The constituent assembly will comprise a range of secular and Islamist parties. More than 90 have registered. In a system of proportional representation in large constituencies, fewer than ten of them will probably get seats. The new constitution is likely to be both presidential and parliamentary, perhaps resembling the model of France, with which Tunisia still has many links. “But we don’t want it to be presidentialist,” says Rafaa Ben Achour, a minister of state and constitutional lawyer, stressing the last syllable.

Virtually every opinion poll puts Nahda, the main Islamist party, in the lead. It wins kudos for its courage and apparent incorruptibility under Mr Ben Ali, who imprisoned many of its leaders (and at one time a good 5,000 of the rank and file), some of them for 20 years. But no poll suggests that Nahda would come close to getting an outright majority. A recent one gave it 14%; its main rival, the Progressive Democratic Party (PDP), in the secular centre, got 5%. More than two-thirds of Tunisians said they had not made up their minds. Few people, even the Islamists, predict that it will get more than 25%.

The big question is whether Nahda, led by a dignified 70-year-old, Rashid Ghannouchi, who returned this year after more than 20 years in exile, mostly in London, will emerge as the most potent single political force—and whether secular Tunisians, whose various parties together could easily form a majority, would allow it to wield a dominant influence, let alone untrammelled power.

Mr Ghannouchi (no relation of Muhammad Ghannouchi, the short-term prime minister after Mr Ben Ali’s fall) has bent over backwards to present Nahda as moderate and tolerant. His colleagues promise to abide by the rules of democracy, insist on women’s rights, and say they will not impose sharia law, ban alcohol or deter skimpily clad tourists from the West. Like Islamists across the Arab world who have refashioned themselves under new freedoms, Nahda says it looks to Turkey’s mild-mannered ruling Islamists.

But many of the three-quarters or so of Tunisians who do not consider themselves Islamist mistrust Nahda, many of them deeply. Again and again, secular-minded Tunisians accuse it of speaking in different tongues to different people. “They do not understand democracy or freedom,” says Mustapha Mezghani, a businessman who has set up a liberal party. “The least one can say is that they are ambiguous,” says Maya Jribi, the PDP’s co-leader, while deploring Nahda’s tendency, as she puts it, to “use the mosque for sending its political message”.

One movement, calling itself the Modernist Democratic Pole, including the former communist party, Tajdid, is trying to band all secular groups together to ensure that Nahda is kept out of power. Yet most Tunisians also seem aware that excluding Nahda from power could be more destabilising for the country than letting it in, perhaps even as a partner in coalition, at least during a jittery period of transition.

In any event, Tunisia needs a financial helping hand for the next year or so. In late May the G8 group of rich countries promised $20 billion to Tunisia and Egypt in loans and grants over the next three years, of which several billion is to go to Tunisia—the first tranche, according to the finance minister, within a few weeks. It is sorely needed. Economic growth, which was nearly 4% last year, will fall this year to less than 1%. Tourism, which accounted for 7% of GDP, has collapsed. Youth unemployment is around 23%, according to the labour minister. The minimum industrial wage for a 48-hour week is around $50. Of the 700,000 officially reckoned to be jobless in a population of 10.6m, some 170,000 are graduates—the angriest part of a populace enraged by the inequities and corruption that helped spark the revolution against Mr Ben Ali.

The mood in the harsh interior, where the revolution began, is impatient. In Kasserine, a town 300km (180 miles) south-west of Tunis, protesters call for the provincial governor, a military man, to go. Barbed wire surrounds banks and state-owned offices, with armoured cars outside. Civic leaders say that 40% of the townsfolk are unemployed. Last week two prisoners died in the third jail riot since January.

“If there is another social explosion, democracy will be stymied,” says Ms Jribi. Almost everyone in Tunis agrees, often adding that it is also vital that Libya, by far its closest neighbour, also comes right, with Muammar Qaddafi removed. “We consider the Libyan people an extension of the Tunisian people,” says the finance minister. If Libya is set free and Tunisia’s own electoral course goes according to plan, with the angry young men in such towns as Kasserine persuaded to hold their breath, the country could indeed become a beacon for the rest of the Arab world.

Source: http://www.economist.com/node/18958251

Afghan provincial intel chief targeted in bombing

KABUL: A suicide bomber attacked a car carrying a provincial head of Afghanistan’s intelligence agency on Monday, wounding the spy and killing a child in the north of the country, police said.

The bomber detonated next to a car in which the National Directorate of Security (NDS) official was travelling at 8:20am in Maymanah in Faryab province, Lal Mohammad, police spokesman for the northern region, told AFP.

“The chief of NDS was going to his office when the attacker, a person wearing a suicide vest, detonated near his car.

“One child is killed and six other people, including the provincial chief of NDS, are injured,” said Mohammad.

Mohammad had said initially that a “number of civilians” were killed.

Source: http://www.dawn.com/2011/10/17/afghan-provincial-intel-chief-targeted-in-bombing.html

Bolivians rebuke Morales in judicial ballot

LA PAZ: Most Bolivians who voted in Sunday’s election to choose the country’s top judges cast invalid ballots in what would be a stinging rebuke for President Evo Morales, according to unofficial partial results.

If the results hold, it would the first defeat at the polls for the leftist coca-grower’s union leader of his nearly six-year presidency.

Official results were not expected for at least five days in the vote for 56 judgeships on Bolivia’s top four tribunals, including its supreme and constitutional courts.

But an unofficial count by the Ipsos, Opinion y Mercado polling firm found 61 percent of voters cast ballots that were either null or blank. It said its count was based on 75 percent of the vote.

A sober-looking Morales declared himself ”very pleased with the public’s participation” in brief words to the news media. He asserted that ”those who called the boycott have failed.”

Opposition leaders had called on voters to cast invalid ballots to protest what they considered a power grab.

They contended that the election would erode the independence of the judiciary and strengthen Morales because the 114 candidates were chosen by a Congress dominated by his governing MAS movement.

A leading opposition politician, Samuel Doria Medina, said the results proved the election was ”illegitimate.” He called for starting the judicial selection process from scratch.

Under electoral rules, only a majority of valid votes are needed to fill each judicial post.

Prior to a new constitution championed by Morales and approved by voters, the legislature chose judges for the top courts.

The opposition accuses Morales of using the judiciary to persecute adversaries. Several opposition leaders are in exile after being accused of sedition. Morales comfortably won re-election in December 2009 but his popularity has plummeted in the past year over policy decisions that angered many Bolivians.

First, Morales declared just after Christmas that he was ending subsidies on gasoline; he reversed himself after major protests.

Then he insisted on a highway through a lowlands indigenous preserve, and drew further public outrage when police last month attacked Indians marching against it.

Morales has indicated he wants to run for a third term in 2014.

Source: http://www.dawn.com/2011/10/17/bolivians-rebuke-morales-in-judicial-ballot.html

‘Islam and democracy are not contradictory’

Older News

TUNIS: Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan made the case for “Islam and democracy” on Thursday in Tunisia, where moderate Islamists modelled on his own party are tipped to win landmark October polls.

On a visit to the country where the “Arab Spring” began, Erdogan also produced the kind of trademark warning to Israel that has earned him hero status across the region. “Islam and democracy are not contradictory. A Muslim can run a state very successfully,” said the 57-year-old after a meeting with his Tunisian counterpart Beji Caid Essebsi.

“The success of the electoral process in Tunisia will show the world that democracy and Islam can go together,” he added.

After ousting Zine el Abidine Ben Ali, one of the world’s most entrenched dictators, Tunisians are due to pick a constituent assembly in October 23 elections pollsters predict will be won by the Ennahda (Renaissance) party.

Rached Ghannouchi’s party is a moderate Islamist movement which was fiercely repressed under Ben Ali’s 23-year rule and claims inspiration from Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party.

Secular Tunisians and intellectuals have expressed fears that an Ennahda election victory could set back religious freedom and women’s rights, despite Ghannouchi’s assurances. “Turkey is 99 percent Muslim yet it is a democratic secular state where all religions are equal,” Erdogan said. “A Muslim, a Christian and a Jew are equal in a secular state.” Analyst Faycal Cherif argued that Erdogan’s thinly-veiled support for Ghannouchi, whom he was due to meet later Thursday, was a huge boost for Ennahda.

“Turkey is a heavyweight. It cannot be completely innocent for Erdogan to visit Tunisia with elections just a month away. He is sending a reassuring message to public opinion: do not fear Ennahda,” Cherif said.

Ankara was one of the first powers to support the protest movement by Tunisian youths demanding jobs and regime change and Turkey’s foreign minister was among the first top officials to visit after Ben Ali’s January ouster.

Among the constituent assembly’s tasks will be the drafting of a new constitution for Tunisia, where the outcome of the revolution is being closely scrutinised by other Arab countries and the rest of the world.

After the rapturous welcome he received on the first leg of his “Arab Spring tour” in Cairo confirmed his rising regional status, Erdogan took yet another swipe at Israel when he spoke after his meeting with Essebsi.

“Israel will no longer be able to do what it wants in the Mediterranean and you’ll be seeing Turkish warships in this sea,” Erdogan said.

He reiterated his insistence on an Israeli apology for last year’s raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla that left nine pro-Palestinian activists dead, all of them Turks or of Turkish origin.

Source: http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=67837&Cat=1

No small matter By Hajrah Mumtaz

MOST people would, at least initially, tend to shrug the matter away. Concerns about people’s ability to question the great and the good in government?

People’s ‘right’ to gain access to information about what public entities and departments are doing? Dream on, they’d say.

Let’s start with the right to food, water and a generally decent life; let’s start with some human rights.

Thought about just a little more deeply, though, the fallaciousness of this line of reasoning becomes clear. Why don’t a lot of people have access to food or potable water, for example? In general terms, because of mismanagement, the lack of planning and — here one can hear lots of voices piping up — that scourge of Pakistan, corruption. Most will get this far and start calling
for accountability. Fewer, though, will pause and think about what accountability means.

In the very first instance, someone who does something for which they ought to be held accountable later is a person who does not expect to be found out. In other words, certain knowledge that information can be withheld can allow dishonesty of purpose. Veils of secrecy make shady deals and wheels within wheels, or just plain inefficiency or even laziness, much more likely. The ability to keep information from getting out is the first box to tick on the list of any potential fraudster; the first crutch of those guilty of the dereliction of duty.

‘Knowledge is power’ is just about the oldest aphorism in the book. And a people with access to knowledge about those that rule over their lives and country — knowledge about how that task is accomplished — are very powerful indeed. So it is that access to information has always been at the heart of the tussle between bureaucracies the world over and the people: the latter want it, the former doesn’t want to cough it up because unsavoury secrets may come to light; accountability may occur.

Realising the role that access to information plays in fostering improved and more honest governance, many countries have enacted legislation making public access to certain sorts of information mandatory — the ‘transparency’, in short, that every Pakistani craves.

Technically, Pakistanis too have the right to freely access information. In fact, we were the first South Asian country to come up with a law in this regard, the Freedom of Information Ordinance 1997 which was later fine-tuned by the Musharraf government into the Freedom of Information Ordinance 2002.

However, many have argued that although this did, at least technically, give Pakistanis the legal tool to demand information from governmental bodies, it remains merely that: a technicality. In practice, the legislation is riddled with clauses that allow secrets to remains under wraps.

Its detractors — and there are a great many of them (the few proponents seemingly comprising stakeholders in secrecy in the bureaucracy itself) — say that exemptions and procedures given to governmental departments under the 2002 ordinance
are such that they render it virtually and practically ineffective.

There are other points of criticism as well, such as that it deals with only federal ministries and divisions (although two provinces subsequently passed their own legislation, i.e. the Balochistan Freedom of Information Act 2005 and the Sindh Freedom of Information Act 2006). Other criticisms are that the 2002 ordinance’s implementing mechanisms — means through which reluctant bureaucracies can be prodded into actually producing the information demanded — are such that they invite evasiveness, and that there is no protection for whistleblowers.

The civil bureaucracy wields considerable power anywhere in the world; it is a machine that runs under its own weight and is notoriously averse to letting any information out. Political circles everywhere seek to control it; as permanent secretary Sir Humphrey Appleby smirked during an episode of Yes, Minister, “ministers come and go, but I go on forever”. Transparency, one route to which is the right to information, is important in this regard. Pakistan has not been lacking in those demanding better legislation on people’s right to information, though one could wish there were a few more voices. Amongst them are a number of activists and reformers, some of whom have argued for this cause on these pages.

Amongst politicians, a staunch proponent has been former information and broadcasting minister Sherry Rehman. Last week, she submitted a draft of her Right to Information Bill before the National Assembly, a project she initiated in 2004 with the submission of an initial draft that called for deep-reaching amendments to the 2002 ordinance. Updated versions of the bill were also submitted for review in 2006 and 2008.

The 2011 Right to Information Bill seeks a repeal of the 2002 legislation and tries to close some of the gaps. There are more stringent implementing mechanism clauses, whistleblower-protection clauses and most interestingly, a clause that seeks to bring large private companies within the ambit of the law if and when it is approved.

If the new proposals do become law, they are likely to have at least some positive effect. Sporadic articles published in various newspapers over the years have documented individuals’ (failed) efforts, under the 2002 ordinance, to obtain information from various departments. In most cases, these people cited the loopholes in the legislation itself that allowed bureaucracies to retain their secrets.

On March 29, 2008 — soon after receiving a unanimous vote of confidence in parliament, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani set out his administration’s 100-day priorities.

Amongst those that remain unfulfilled well past the 100-day deadline is a new freedom of information law. And the 18th Amendment inserted Article 19(A) into the constitution, which explicitly recognises that every citizen shall have the right to have access to information in all matters of public importance (subject to regulation and reasonable restrictions imposed by law).

It’s about time these promises were fulfilled.

Source: http://www.dawn.com/2011/10/17/no-small-matter.html

Honoured for what? By Huma Yusuf

I HAD barely been at university for two weeks when the buzz began: Nelson Mandela, then president of South Africa, was coming to campus to receive an honorary degree.

It was the third time in the institution’s 362-year history that a special convocation would be held to bestow such an award: the previous recipients were George Washington and Winston Churchill. It was history in the making.

The convocation ranks as one of the most memorable days of my life: over 25,000 people gathered in my university yard to hear Mandela speak, and see him receive the distinct honour. It also offered one of the most important lessons of my university years: that the best learning does not necessarily happen in the classroom.

For a freshman, attending the historic recognition of Mandela’s struggles against apartheid was an exercise in humility. I believed until then that a good degree was a ticket to success; his example demonstrated that it would take much more than just graduating to make a real difference.

Since Interior Minister Rehman Malik received an honorary degree from the University of Karachi, and that too in a special
ceremony at the Governor House, the memory of Mandela’s convocation has recurred to me many times. In retrospect, what strikes me most about that event is that before Mandela took the podium, the president of the university delivered a speech explaining why Mandela was receiving an honorary degree.

The speech listed all of Mandela’s achievements, from his early years as a student activist to his time in prison and his gains as South Africa’s first black president. None in that crowd of thousands would have disputed that Mandela deserved the degree, and yet the university president retraced his long walk to freedom.

I now realise that this preamble was necessary to maintain the integrity of the institution by publicly justifying its motivations for honouring Mandela.

As such, the convocation was simultaneously a celebration of Mandela’s remarkable career and the university’s values. The message for assembled students was clear: do not take accolades lightly, earn them and revere them. It is truly unfortunate that Malik’s recent degree ceremony conveyed a far less inspiring message for Pakistan’s college-age students.

In a country where knowledge and merit are regularly trounced by violence and social connections, Malik’s honorary degree reiterates that who you know is more important than what you know.

This message rings truer because an incomplete university syndicate approved the decision to award Malik the degree, meaning that proper university protocol was not observed in this case. Speaking to the press, many KU faculty members have
expressed serious reservations about the decision. This dissent will no doubt further mar the integrity of the university administration.

The obvious political dimensions of the award could also have far-reaching consequences for educational environments.

Students may be more inclined to engage with the student wings of political parties, believing those contacts to be more useful to their future success than their coursework. Given the aggressive and counterproductive nature of student politics at KU, this is not necessarily a good thing. Student politics are meant to nurture the bud of democracy, not blight it with nepotism.

The award is particularly damaging in light of the recent ‘fake degree’ scandal in our parliament (who can forget Balochistan Chief Minister Nawab Aslam Raisani’s “a degree is a degree, whether it is fake or genuine” logic?). That episode had senior politicians discrediting the worth of education by deeming it irrelevant. Malik’s doctoral degree is further proof that educational qualifications have utility even if they are hollow and shambolic. Many are also questioning the timing of the degree, which acknowledges Malik’s efforts to bring stability to Karachi and fight terrorism. Violence continues to erupt in corners of Karachi, and recent newspaper headlines have decried the non-implementation of the Supreme Court’s recommendations in its suo motu judgment.

Counterterror initiatives are also flagging: there has been an uptick in terror attacks; Pakistan’s recent tensions with the US cast doubt on its commitment to dismantle militant groups; and the memory of the terrorist attack against the Mehran naval base in Karachi lingers. In short, the task of bringing peace to Pakistan has barely even begun — any awards that imply otherwise are certainly premature.

There’s also the simple matter of lowered standards for politicians: as the interior minister of our country, it is Malik’s job to stem violence in the commercial capital and to spearhead the national fight against terror groups. His achievements, however they are counted, are the basic responsibility of his political position. That which KU has recognised him for is what our other elected representatives should be doing day in and day out, in service of the nation.

Take a step back from the situation and it becomes disturbing to think that a politician who makes a few gestures that resemble service is awarded an honorary doctoral degree. Leave aside the political context of the award and it becomes an indication of how low Pakistani expectations of politicians are.

Ultimately, though, the most problematic aspect of Malik’s honorary degree is the negative impact it has on role models for Pakistani youth. Already, our country’s youngsters have few nationally revered figures to admire and emulate. Even fewer of these are intellectuals. Our one Nobel Prize laureate has been wiped from the public imagination owing to rampant religious discrimination.

The controversy surrounding Malik’s degree could cast doubt on the integrity — and more importantly, the relevance — of genuine academics throughout the country. And that’s the last thing a country suffering such severe intellectual poverty needs.

Source: http://www.dawn.com/2011/10/17/honoured-for-what.html

Poverty in Pakistan by By M. Zaidi

IN Pakistan’s scenario, where approximately two-thirds of the people live in rural areas, rural poverty is a major destabilising factor. Authoritative studies have documented rising poverty levels with a decreased capacity to acquire and hold land which is the main source of subsistence in the agricultural areas.

Nearly 67 per cent of Pakistan’s households are landless (though this cannot in itself be taken to be the sole denominator of poverty in the country). The problem is thrown into sharp relief when compared to the decline in India’s rural poverty levels between 1987 and 2000.

The comparison is pertinent since both countries inherited a nearly identical system of land holdings and feudalism. India seems to have tackled the issues better than Pakistan which appears to have alternated between monetary policies dictated by the IMF and the World Bank and its own experiments with land reforms which proved unsuccessful. The income disparity between the ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’ in Pakistan has also increased significantly while income disparity largely became an urban phenomenon during the period under review.

Since the reasons behind the rise of radicalisation are multifarious, an analysis utilising any single variable would be empirical, not to mention misleading. Nevertheless, whenever socioeconomic factors spring up in debates, the relationship between rural poverty and radicalisation figures quite prominently. Rural poverty was going down in Pakistan in the 1970s and 1980s but started increasing steadily during the 1990s. Although the methodologies and assumptions interpolated into the projection by a publicly funded Pakistani body are open to discussion, the poverty increase trend in the 1990s is alarming.

The official notification points out that nearly 67 per cent of households owned no land at the time this study came out; 18.25 per cent households owned less than five acres of land; and 9.66 per cent owned between five and 12.5 acres, sufficient only to provide meagre levels of existence for sometimes large extended families that tend to rely on land as the sole source of income. The pattern is dismally skewed towards a few feudal families in possession of large land holdings; barely one per cent (0.64 per cent plus 0.37 per cent) of households owned over 35 acres.

Thus, the problem in Pakistan is not just low levels of land holdings but also highly unequal land distribution leading to a class of ‘land haves and have-nots’.

Strikingly, poverty levels tend to decrease in inverse proportion to land-holdings, with poverty virtually disappearing with holdings of 55 acres and above. This indicates that poverty and landlessness are directly related to each other in Pakistan’s rural areas.

In terms of the spatial distribution of landlessness, 86 per cent of the households in Sindh were landless (landless plus non-agricultural), followed by 78 per cent in Balochistan and 74 per cent in Punjab. The evidence of the income disparity rampant in Pakistani society is bolstered by statistics, with the Lorenz curve of 2001-02 for Pakistan lying below the 1984-85 levels. In economics, the Lorenz curve is often used to represent income distribution and can also be used to show the distribution of assets.

This indicates that income distribution patterns have gradually worsened, resulting in higher income inequality in 2001-02 relative to 1984-85. Greater changes are visible in the higher part of the income distribution curves than in the middle and lower parts of the income brackets. This stipulates that during 2001-02, the upper income brackets registered a gain in income share to the richest 20 per cent at the expense of the poorest 20 per cent and middle 60 per cent.

This increased poverty levels in the lower and middle brackets. This projection also indicates that the richest one per cent who used to get 10 per cent of the total income in 1984-85 was, in 2001-02, getting almost 20 per cent.

It is estimated that in 1998-99, 30.6 per cent of Pakistanis were living below the poverty line. The estimate stands at 23.9 per cent in the period 2004-5, and according to official projections, dropped to 22.3 per cent by 2005-6. Rural poverty was estimated at 27 per cent in 2005-06, unfavourably comparing with an urban incidence of 13.1 per cent.

The official surveys have, however, been criticised on the grounds of faulty methodologies and the padding of results. A World Bank survey put the figures of poverty incidence in Pakistan at 28.3 per cent in 2004-05, with income distribution patterns utilising the Gini coefficient yielding a figure of 0.3 in 2005-06 as compared to 0.27 in 2001-02. This indicates that there is a skewed income distribution pattern in favour of the high earners, which negates the gains made in the eradication of absolute poverty by increasing income inequality. The overall poverty incidence was highest in Balochistan, with almost half the population living below the poverty line, with minimal difference between the poverty incidence in Sindh and Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa. However, once the Sindh data was adjusted for the skewed data patterns for rural poverty obtained by the inclusion of Karachi by comparing rural Sindh with rural Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, the Sindh figures rose to 38 per cent of the rural population living under the poverty line as compared to 27 per cent in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

Punjab fared the best, with an overall poverty incidence of 26 per cent and, anomalously, a rural poverty incidence of just 24 per cent. This also implies that rural poverty was lower than average in both Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Punjab, which seems to militate against conventional wisdom and other studies.

However, the problem is compounded once other variables such as lack of education, cultural and social paradigms are factored in, areas that need greater research in order to present a more meaningful picture of poverty in Pakistan.

The writer is a security analyst.

Source: http://www.dawn.com/2011/10/17/poverty-in-pakistan.html

Draft of new visa accord with India finalised

NEW DELHI: The Joint Working Group of Pakistan and India finalised a draft of a new visa agreement after examining modalities for streamlining visa procedures at a two-day meeting that concluded here on Friday.

The agreement is meant to ease travel between the two countries, said a joint statement issued after the second meeting of the working group.

The finalised draft of the agreement will be submitted to the two governments for approval for signing of the accord at an early date.

The meeting was a follow-up to the deliberations of the JWG’s first meeting held in Islamabad on June 2-3. It took place in pursuance of the decision taken during the India-Pakistan home/interior secretary-level talks held in New Delhi on March 28-29.

Anil Goswami, additional secretary (foreigners), ministry of home affairs, led the Indian delegation and Nasar Hayat, additional secretary, ministry of interior, headed the Pakistani team at the meeting.

“The discussions were held in a friendly and cordial atmosphere. The two sides finalised the draft text of the agreement which will be submitted to the respective governments for obtaining necessary approval in order to sign the agreement at an early date,” the Indian side was quoted as saying by Times of India in a statement.—APP

Source: http://www.dawn.com/2011/10/15/draft-of-new-visa-accord-with-india-finalised.html

BBC: Italy PM Silvio Berlusconi wins confidence vote

Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi has won a key confidence vote in parliament, sparked by questions over his handling of the economy and personal scandals.

Mr Berlusconi won the vote in the lower house by 316 vote to 301.

Italy's government credit rating was recently downgraded and parliament failed to back a key part of the budget this week, triggering the vote.

Mr Berlusconi also faces trial on sex, bribery and abuse of power charges.

The outcome of the vote was in doubt until the last minute - even some of Mr Berlusconi's own MPs were expressing uncertainty.

Most of the opposition boycotted the first round of the vote, raising questions about whether there were enough MPs to form a quorum.

Berlusconi in numbers

·         At least 51 votes of confidence (including 14 October vote) in his government since it took power in 2008

·         Three election victories - 1994, 2001 and 2008

·         Two election defeats - 1996 and 2006

·         Four ongoing trials

·         $9bn - net worth of Berlusconi and his family (Forbes, 2010)

·         2,500 court appearances at 106 trials over 20 years

On Saturday, he also faces a mass demonstration of some 200,000 people in Rome - similar to recent ones in New York and Madrid - against austerity measures and financial mismanagement.

Italy is considered vulnerable in the current eurozone crisis, with the highest public debt among countries using the European single currency.

The country approved an austerity package last month to balance the budget by 2013 but its central bank chief this week urged the government to introduce more measures to stimulate growth.

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15302695

UNITED NATIONS Rights Head Warns Of 'Civil War' In Syria – Al-Jazeera Intl News

International community urged to take immediate action as UN's estimated death toll since protests began exceeds 3,000.

The number of people killed in Syria in violence related to protests against President Bashar al-Assad's government has now reached more than 3,000, the United Nations human rights chief has said, as she has called for "the international community to take immediate measures to protect the Syrian people".

Navi Pillay, the UN's high commissioner for human rights, expressed her deep dismay at the "remorseless toll of human lives", according to a statement released from the body's head office in Geneva on Friday.

"The number of people killed since the violence started in March has now exceeded 3,000, including at least 187 children. More than 100 people have been reported killed in the last 10 days alone," she said.

"In addition, thousands have been arrested, detained, forcibly disappeared and tortured. Family members inside and outside the country have been targeted for harassment, intimidation, threats and beatings.

"As more members of the military refuse to attack civilians and change sides, the crisis is already showing worrying signs of descending into an armed struggle."

"The Government of Syria has manifestly failed to protect its population. Furthermore, it has ignored the international community's calls to co-operate with international investigations," the UN human rights chief said.

Meanwhile, activists said at least 9 people were killed in demonstrations across the country on Friday and that the number was expected to rise, Al Jazeera's Rula Amin reported from Beirut in neighbouring Lebanon.

   "The demonstrations spread from Dera'a in the south to the central part of the country in Homs, in Idlib, and to the eastern part in Deir Azzour," Amin said.

"The slogans today were of course, the toppling of the regime, a call on Syrian officers and soldiers to refuse orders to shoot and a call on international community to provide help and to provide protection for civilians."

International action

Pillay said that the international community must take "protective action in a collective and decisive manner", before the violence drives Syria into "a full-blown civil war".

"Sniping from rooftops, and indiscriminate use of force against peaceful protesters - including the use of live
ammunition and the shelling of residential neighbourhoods - have become routine occurrences in many Syrian cities," Pillay said.

Such call by the UN human rights commissioner "will mean very good news for the [Syrian] people, because it will add pressure on the international community to do something," but it is unclear what exactly they expect the world to do, our correspondent Rula Amin said.

Some say they do want military intervention and even welcome it because of the intensity to which Assad has cracked down on the population with violence, Amin said.

"They're talking about no fly zones, to stop the Syrian military and the government from using planes and tanks."

However, one member of the coalition of opposition groups, said the struggle against the Assad regime must remain peaceful.

"There is a pull by some people to take the country towards armed resistance, [but] most people disagree," said Louay Safi, the chair of the political office of the Syrian National Council (SNC).

"The council itself believe the best option it to have unarmed resistance - a peaceful resistance."

"We should avoid civil war at all costs and we believe the regime will fall if the people continue opposing it and the world stops giving support [to the government] from the outside," Safi added.

Arab League

Arab League foreign ministers will hold an emergency meeting on Sunday to discuss the ongoing unrest in protest-hit Syria, Al Jazeera's Rawya Rageh said.

The meeting will "apparently look into what measures they can take against the Syrian regime, after it has refused all recommendations put forward by the League in their last meeting on Syria" ... including a list of political reforms and dispatching a fact-finding mission from the League, an Arab League source said, according to Rageh.

The 22-member Arab League has not yet approved the request but such meetings need only the approval of two members to take place.

Six member states of the Gulf Co-operation Council (GCC) called for such a  meeting on Thursday, demanding on the need address "the situation in Syria, which has deteriorated sharply, particularly in its humanitarian dimensions, and steps that could help end the bloodshed and halt the machine of violence".

In a meeting on September 13, Arab foreign ministers met in Cairo and called on the Syrian authorities to "immediately stop the bloodshed," drawing a testy response from Damascus.

Nabil al-Arabi, the Arab League chief, had met Assad three days earlier and presented him with a 13-point document outlining Arab proposals for reform.

Source:http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/10/2011101492410996889.html

US to send troops to Uganda to help fight LRA rebels

US President Barack Obama has said he is sending about 100 US soldiers to Uganda to help regional forces battle the notorious Lord's Resistance Army.

Although combat-equipped, the troops would be providing information and advice "to partner nation forces", Mr Obama wrote in a letter to US Congress.

A small group is already in Uganda, and the troops could later be deployed in other central African nations.

The LRA is blamed for mass murder, rape and kidnapping in the region.

'Kill or capture'

"I have authorised a small number of combat-equipped US forces to deploy to central Africa to provide assistance to regional forces that are working toward the removal of (LRA leader) Joseph Kony from the battlefield," Mr Obama wrote on Friday.

But he stressed that "although the US forces are combat-equipped... they will not themselves engage LRA forces unless necessary for self-defence".

Mr Obama did not provide any details about the deployment duration, but a US military spokesman later told the BBC that the "forces are prepared to stay as long as necessary to enable regional security forces to carry on independently".

The force will use hi-tech equipment to assist in what analysts say is a "kill or capture" policy, the BBC's Marcus George in Washington reports.

The deployment follows recent US legislation to help disarm the LRA and bring its leader to justice. The theory is, our correspondent adds, that without Joseph Kony, the movement will collapse from within.

Senator John McCain said Central Africa would be more stable if the threat of the LRA "under the sadistic leadership of Joseph Kony," would be "diminished".

But Mr McCain, a long-serving senator, former veteran and Mr Obama's opponent in the 2008 presidential election, expressed "regret" that the president did not consult with Congress on the decision to sent troops to Uganda.

"I remember how past military deployments intended to further worthy humanitarian goals, whether it was peace-keeping operations in Lebanon or Somalia, resulted in tragedies that we never intended or expected," Mr McCain said in a statement.

Child soldiers

At least 30,000 people died as the LRA spread terror in northern Uganda for more than 20 years, displacing some two million people.

It is notorious for kidnapping children, forcing the boys to become fighters and using girls as sex slaves.

The group is listed by the US as a terrorist organisation and now operates mainly in neighbouring countries such as Democratic Republic of Congo, South Sudan and Central Africa Republic.

Joseph Kony and his close aides have been wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) since 2005.

He refused to sign a peace deal with the Ugandan government in 2008 when it could not guarantee the withdrawal of the ICC arrest warrants.

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15317684