February 13^th, 2012. Islamabad. For those of us still following the game of thrones taking place at the center, it appears that Prime Minister Gilani is running out of road. He’s taking a long walk off a short pier. Insert your own cliché here. The debate has overtaken the Prime Minister, the discussion is now focused on what Pakistan must do, post-Gilani. To write the letter or not? Will Senate elections go ahead or not? Will the PPP spin this ungraceful end to a five year term as a victory, will Gilani go back to Multan a living shaheed? Pity the constituency whose only claim to a fruitful five year term is a representative with a knack for getting stabbed in the stomach and making it look like he meant to fall on his sword. Gilani will end up being a sacrifice for an utterly worthless cause – twenty-eight million US dollars that will never be returned to the people of Pakistan. Ever.

The statute of limitations on the Swiss cases are rumored to be anywhere between April and August 2012. The time for reopening old cases is diminishing fast. Yet we insist that the court charade of the last few months was necessary – it’s not about the money, it’s about setting an institutional precedent.

It has been nearly two decades since our President and his late wife stole a mind-bubbling sum of money and squirreled it away into Swiss banks, mansions in Surrey, bank accounts in Dubai and trendy flats in London. Reading the famous 1998 New York Times article reinforces the idea that when politicians from very poor countries amass vast amounts of wealth, they are not likely to let go of it that easily. So forget fantasies of liquidating the Bhutto assets and paying off Pakistan’s international loans. The Pakistani Supreme Court can humiliate the Prime Minister, but it can’t overturn decades of sophisticated white collar crime, much of which takes place outside its judicial territory.

And surely impotence of this intensity is severely humiliating for Chief Justice Chaudhry himself. Having become the defacto arbitrator of every aggrieved party in Pakistan, he suddenly finds himself without any implementation power whatsoever. He is the supreme commander of a court system that is rotten at the foundation, fighting the country’s largest and most public corruption scandal while his own lower court clerks accept petty bribes to tie up litigation for years. His own middle-class biases against the landed elite of the PPP notwithstanding, Chaudhary now faces the task of living up to the dubious honor of being the sole institution in this country deemed impartial and uncorrupt. Which means that if he isn’t seen going after egregious acts of corruption, he will be immediately deemed implicit.

In the face of such impotence, charging and convicting a seated Prime Minister of contempt is a sufficiently bold task to secure Chaudhary’s tripod of potency: judicial independence, of having real power (as opposed to simply striking down the NRO and not being able to do a damn thing to implement it for a full two years), and of being a guardian of the people. Gilani’s removal, whenever it happens, will be sufficiently large to distract from the fact that the PM never stole the twenty-eight million. He never decided to write the letter, or not to write it, for that matter – any more than he decided to become Prime Minister. It will serve to silence those who suggest that post-reinstatement, the CJ has been “bought out” by the PPP, to outcry those who notice that investigations into sugar cartels, NILC, Hajj, Abbotabad,  and Karachi came to naught. It is eye candy for the myopic, a desperate sideshow to distract from a flaming circus of budget malfunctions, energy scams and policy fubars.

But lets not beat ourselves up too much. John Burns pointed out in 1998 that multilateral organizations such as the World Bank regularly support teetering Third World economies “bled dry” by corruption in exchange for weak promises of institutional reform. The last five years have been immensely lucrative for friends of the regime, for those individuals and institutions capable of buying out or bullying Mr. Hundered Percent. At last count, this included everyone from ARY Gold to the Pakistan Army, from AKD to NLC to the men who bring you fantastically overpriced imported cars at huge markups. Zardari did not invent corruption, but he’s a fine example (an institutional precedent, as it were) of just how successful some men and women become in countries with broken democratic systems. Where the Army can quietly wring the neck of anyone attempting to infringe on its economic and political territory. Where an entire Parliament – incumbent, opposition and all – routes all decision-making through the Supreme Court. Where a judge is deeply contemptuous of men who take advantage of their office for personal aggrandizement – and then goes and does exactly the same.

Transparency International Pakistan says Gilani tenure has given a loss of Rs 8,500 billions in corruption so far. Still nincompoos and corrupts in government expect people to pay taxes like “responsible” citizens. Yes, people like us who pay taxes despite corruption are responsible and they are responsible for beeing ignorant.

People should go for a collective boycott of taxes and take back the country from these evil ruling elite.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Rs 8,500 bn corruption mars Gilani tenure: Transparency

Source : http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=12258&Cat=13

by Ansar Abbasi

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan has lost an unbelievably high amount, more than Rs8,500 billion (Rs8.5 trillion or US$94 billion), in corruption, tax evasion and bad governance during the last four years of Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani’s tenure, Transparency International Pakistan (TIP) claims.

The TIP advisor, Adil Gillani, told The News that the real impact of corruption in the country’s economy is far more than what is generally estimated or what is formally uncovered. He believes that Pakistan does not need even a single penny from the outside world if it effectively checks the menace of corruption and ensures good governance.

It is generally believed that the four years of the present regime under Gilani had been the worst in terms of corruption and bad governance in the country’s history. Past records of corruption were broken and Pakistan started rising in the ranks of the most corrupt nations of the world.

There has been no check on corruption as the anti-corruption institutions like the National Accountability Bureau and Federal Investigation Agency instead of checking corruption have been siding with the corrupt.

These institutions have been helping the corrupt to get off the hook by distorting and mutilating the evidence in favour of the influential accused.
Adil Gillani, the TIP representative, who too has been haunted by the government during these years for producing corruption reports, explained that the TIP pointed out corruption of Rs390 billion in 2008, Rs450 billion in 2009, Rs825 billion in 2010 and Rs1,100 billion in 2011 under the present regime. The total of these identified cases of corruption is Rs2,765 billion.
In addition to this, he explained the following:

The minister of finance of the present regime himself confirmed corruption in FBR of over Rs500 billon per year, which makes the total Rs2,000 billion; Auditor General of Pakistan pointed out Rs315 billion corruption in 2010; Public Accounts Committee recovered Rs115 billion in 30 months till 2011; circular debt is Rs190 million; KESC was given Rs55 billion illegal benefits per annum since 2008; state-owned enterprises like PSO, PIA, Pakistan Steel, Railways, SSGC, SNGC are eating away Rs150-300 billion per annum; tax to GDP ratio in 2008 was 11%, which in 2011 has reduced to 9.1% instead of being increased.

Gillani explained that Pakistan’s Gross Domestic Product is worth US$175 billion and in the light of this the drop of 1.9% in the tax GDP means annual loss of US$ 3.3 billion. This confirms that FBR is losing Rs300 million per annum, which is annual additional loss since 2008 and stands at Rs1,200 billon in four years
The TIP adviser added that India’s tax-GDP ratio is 18%, and at that rate, Pakistan’s tax evasion/corruption in FBR is 9% of $175 billion, which is US$15.5 billion per year, i.e. Rs1,400 billion per year.

It is worth mentioning here that it is not only the Transparency International but there have been different international bodies including the World Bank and world capitals, which have been showing their concern over rising trend of corruption in Pakistan under the Gilani’s regime. It was mounting corruption and extremely bad governance, which even dithered the outside world to offer cash to Pakistan during 2010 and 2011 floods, which devastated different parts of Pakistan and affected millions of people.
At home the corruption became a fashion in such a shameless manner that even the cabinet ministers started openly pointing fingers at each other and even at the highest levels including the prime minister. Some even approached the Supreme Court but despite all this, corruption remained the hallmark of the present regime, which instead of curbing it started defending it in the name of democracy.

The Roosevelt Institute recently celebrated the anniversary of the birth of President Franklin Roosevelt. In this post on the Institute’s website, Senior Fellow David Woolner reviews some of FDR’s accomplishments for a generation that may be more familiar with Facebook than fireside chats. Most of the essay has to do with the domestic economic institutions created during the New Deal but he also notes those international institutions created to preserve the peace of the post-war order under U.S. leadership:

Finally, we should remember that prior to World War II the United States had turned inward and refused to play a leading role in world affairs. Convinced that the Second World War had come about in part from the global economic depravity that helped give rise to fascism in Europe and Asia, FDR used the war as a catalyst for the construction of a new political, strategic, and economic order. It was based in large part on the extension of American moral and military power through the United Nations and the extension of American economic power through the creation of the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and a new multilateral economic system that would open up the world’s markets and natural resources to freer trade. Taken together, these measures resulted in a permanent restructuring of the world’s social, economic, and strategic makeup. They formed the basis of the new world order that has given rise to the globalization of the world’s economy and the American-led multilateral security system that the United States has played a leading role in since 1945.

As much as I would like to believe, with Woolner, that these institutions still form the basis of a stable world order, it’s clear that time has taken a toll on their legitimacy and credibility. Take the United Nations, for example. Just today, the Security Council failed to pass a resolution on Syria hours after an attack on the city of Hom’s by Assad’s security forces, an attack that some are calling a massacre. U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice voiced “disgust” over the veto by permanent members Russia and China that has derailed any hope of coordinated action to end the violence. The U.S. should be proud of having assembled a broad diplomatic consensus with allies in Europe and the Arab League. In the end, though, it was no match for the veto power wielded by permanent members.

The UN was born in the aftermath of a world war started by dictators and now permanent members of the Security Council are defending a dictator. What would FDR think?

Image Credit: Wikipedia

I’ve been really busy recently, and as a result, my book list has been ignored. I’ve had an ever-growing pile of books which I optimistically purchased, but never got around to actually reading. When I found out I had two weeks off between semesters, I promised myself I would dig in. Alas, less than a … Continue reading »

The State Bank’s annual report makes special mention of the issues of governance and sends out a red alert to the government to fix the economy before Pakistan faces an economic collapse.

“Alarming malnutrition” in Sudan conflict zones: UN
Malnutrition is stalking civilian populations in conflict zones inside the Sudan and Sudanese authorities should end restrictions on United Nations’ staff ability to travel to the affected areas, says UN Undersecretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Valerie Amos. Clashes between Sudanese security forces and rebels that erupted in June have forced about 417,000 people from their homes.

Case of tortured child bride shocks Afghanistan
Afghans have reacted in shock and dismay to the case of a 15-year-old child bride brutally tortured by her husband and his family in a bid to force the youngster into a life of prostitution. The outcry has raised questions on women’s rights progress more than a decade after the end of the Taliban’s rule and prompted Afghan President Hamid Karzai to form an investigative committee.

First domestic abuse hotline in Pakistan assisting women
The first helpline for Pakistani women seeking assistance for domestic violence has been opened by the charity Madadgar, or The Helper, in Karachi, the country’s largest city. More than two-thirds of women in Pakistan suffer some form of abuse at the hands of family members, according to this report.

Robinson, Tutu lead charge against child marriage
Former Irish President Mary Robinson and Archbishop Desmond Tutu are spearheading an initiative on behalf of The Elders to raise awareness around child marriage and the damage the practice causes to 10 million young girls every year. Girls Not Brides aims to mobilize people around the world to support an end to marriages under the age of 18 and protect the basic rights of young females.

Pakistan: Poverty is cited for rise in infanticide
The number of babies abandoned by parents on Pakistan’s streets to die is on the rise, and girls make up the overwhelming majority of the infants, according to local NGO Edhi Foundation. Increasing food prices and grinding poverty are the main causes cited for the upswing in infanticide.

Sex-selective abortions still common in India
A mechanical device that allows authorities to track sonograms and monitor doctors’ abortion decisions is drawing fire from Indian activists as failing to be a solution to gender-selective abortions. Research shows that India has lost 12 million females to selective abortions in the last three decades.

India’s efforts to cut sex selection may be paying off
By and large, growing wealth has only resulted in greater use of sex-selective abortions in the two largest countries on earth, India and China, as well as other countries across Asia. But research shows India might have turned a corner.

Family sizes changing across Latin America
Fertility rates are dropping across Latin America as modern financial realities, improved health care and mass migrations to urban centers have resulted in women exerting more control over family planning. The average fertility rate across the region has dropped from 6 in 1960 to 2.3 in 2010.

Gender equity gains ground worldwide
Gender equality in four key areas — education, health, workforce and rights — is improving across the world, according to a new report from the World Bank. In the last two decades, dozens of countries in Africa and Latin America have passed legislation protecting women’s civil and political rights, and Saudi Arabia is now the only country in the world that maintains restrictions on women voting.

Rise in assaults on Somali women, girls
Aid workers and UN officials are reporting an alarming increase in incidences of rape and sexual abuse against women and girls in southern Somalia, primarily at the hands of the militant group al-Shabab. But the displacement of thousands of women as a result of famine has made them vulnerable to attacks by other men, too, especially in lawless refugee camps where they are preyed upon by rogue militiamen and even government soldiers.

We have discussed on the achievements of Universal Service Fund (USF) in past, but underlying the working structure of USF is a lesson to learn. A lesson on building an institution. While many institutions have gone down the line during the present government tenure, USF have moved up the stairs. A recent Business Recorder Research Report discusses USF with a notable point that the organization was in infancy when the current political setup commenced.

There is no paucity of people in Pakistan, both knowledgeable and uninformed, who associate democratic regimes with managerial bankruptcy and institutional ruination.

If historical evidence wasn a reason enough, the current regimes dismal performance has cemented such judgments.

While various public sector institutions bled (or “weakened” in the Presidents opinion) in recent years, there are very few functioning public sector organisations left.

One such organisation which weathered political whirlwinds and managed to stay on course all these years is the “Universal Service Fund”.

More interesting is the fact that USF was in infancy when the political transition took place in 2008.

USF was established back in 2006 as per the Ministry of IT and Telecoms USF policy of 2005, and commenced its operations in 2007.

In line with World Bank recommendations, it was modelled on public-private-partnership.

The funds board of directors draws representations from government, IT and Telecom sectors and consumer groups.

The government acts as a trustee and monitors the fund performance.

The funds overarching goal was to bridge the digital divide in Pakistan through development of ICT infrastructure in those un-served and under-served areas which were commercially unviable for telecom operators.

To make the voice telephony and data services available and affordable in such areas was central to the funds objectives.

Telecom operators contribute 1.5 percent of their adjusted revenues to the fund, while part of proceeds from “Access Promotion Component” (APC) also land into USF account (maintained at MoIT).

Following the PPRA rules, USF-funded projects are advertised to licensed operators and are bid against.

USF subsidises projects in areas such as rural telephony, broadband and optical fiber cable networks.

For over four and a half years now, USF has contracted projects worth Rs.17.1 billion, in an open and transparent way.

Notwithstanding the slowdown in subsidy disbursals in 2010 and much of 2011, USF is regarded by the sector as a success story as it has achieved some major milestones (see the illustration).

The fact is that the USF experience offers some valuable insights into the process of institutional-building and public-private-partnership in a country like Pakistan.

Despite governments involvement and multimillion dollar contracts, not once has the fund or any of its officials been charged with malpractice.

The governance structure of the fund has largely kept political pressures at bay.

The organisations former CEO, Parvez Iftikhar, happened to be its very first employee.

He literally started this organisation from scratch, set up the office premises, and built a team of professionals to run the fund.

Parvez vacated his post just last month, leaving behind a vibrant and functioning institution which has a lot to cherish and even more to look forward to.

USF takes its funding from licensed telecom players, identifies projects within the sector, invites the same players for bidding, and then subsidises major portion of the project cost.

Though the government controls the fund, it cannot impose its decision arbitrarily.

The Planning Commission should seriously look at this model for under-developed sectors, rather than being all over the place and achieving very little.

For smooth functioning of the fund, its operational and financial autonomy must be protected.

In addition, both the telecom operators and relevant authorities must step up.

Currently, many mobile operators appear reluctant to participate in USF projects due to security issues and higher operating expenditures in remote areas.

The proposed subsidy on operating expenditures must offer some incentive to change that.

Moreover, USF board meetings must be convened regularly so that activity picks up.

Towards that end, government is the one in need to get its act together.

Here is hoping that with a new CEO in charge, USF may continue pursuing its mandate!

The report first appeared in Business Recorder.

Shortly after founding Pakistan in 1947, Mohammed Ali Jinnah said prophetically, “Education is a matter of life and death for Pakistan. The world is progressing so rapidly that without the requisite advance in education, not only shall we be left … Continue reading →

This year like any other before it, was full of events which helped change the world which know of.

It crippled transportation, destroyed telecom, dams and water, ports, disrupted electricity and gas, and effected Japan’s defence and space program. World Bank’s estimated economic cost was US$235 billion, making it the most expensive natural disaster in world history. Despite international media and relief workers were not allowed in the country, what we saw was long cues of Japanese people patiently standing to receive basic stuff like water. The courage with which the nation lifted and emerged out of this tragedy, was the most spirited lesson learnt from this disaster worldwide.

May 2, 2011, Monday, Osama bin Laden
(aged 54) was reportedly killed in a US forces special operation, carried out in Abottabad. The news sent a shock wave throughout the world, but ripples it most created was inside Pakistan. Who? What? How? that followed, continued to spray onto minds of almost all citizens for weeks to come. Notably there were more questions left than answers, amid this saga. Osama was buried in sea within hours, and no visual picture of video is produced till date to confirm. Since American president announced the news instantly, Pakistan was only hoping for a peace to follow after the demise of their more feared enemy. Once again several absentee funerals were also reportedly prayed throughout Pakistan.

Is there any taker of Land Reforms any more?By Akhtar Ali(akhtarali1949@gmail.com)Elections are approaching and political parties are preparing their manifestoes. All are unanimous that people got a raw deal both under dictatorship and democracy. Some leaders argue that corruption is the central issue which if solved would automatically improve the lot of the poor. This may be true but only partly .Some argues that more democracy and unthrottled democracy would, in the long run, eliminate poverty, as happened in the West. While this may be true, democratic societies are also doing some soul searching whether democracy has performed efficiently towards maximizing people’s welfare. There are strong anti-capitalist under currents bringing forth movements like Occupy the Stock-Exchanges .Democracy and a corruption free administration would certainly improve the lot of the poor in the long run. More than one-third of Pakistan’s populace is abject poor and the rest are only slightly better except for a tiny minority. The task of ameliorating if not eliminating poverty is too big. Trickling down effect may take too long, a time span that will endanger the integrity and solidarity of this country.What to do. There is worldwide recession. Economy has performed awfully badly for both domestic and international reasons. There is a misplaced even dangerous perception that things work out themselves and that no major initiatives are necessary, as has been the case with most military dictatorships. The entire cushion, unfortunately, has been eaten up. In our region, our adversary has been progressing faster than ever before. Economic disparity between India and Pakistan cannot be sustained for along time and would lead to the same kind of fissure that led to the dissolution of the Soviet system ; disparity and failure in economic and social performance .We will have to apply some direct tools and policy initiatives to improve the lot of the poor. But the government does not have money; it does have resources and the only transferable resource is Land. We will see in this space as to what can be done in this respect.There is a general thinking that the days of Land redistribution or reforms are over. It is outmoded or out of tune with times. Land redistribution leads to fragmentation which results in lower agricultural productivity. And that land redistribution may result in loss of agricultural production because the poor would not have the working capital to buy the inputs. Many religious scholars have also opposed land redistribution arguing that Islam respects private property. It is also true that most of these arguments have roots in the opposition to Communist ideology in the days of Cold war. There are equally convincing arguments to the contrary ;the Land belongs to Allah; private property rights only pertain to the cultivated land ;land gifted by infidel colonialists to their supporters has no moral or religious sanction or support ;hunger and poverty are enemies of Islam and Allah; feeding the hungry is the state’s responsibility in Islam; smaller tracts in Pakistan are more productive than the large tracts ;mechanization is easy, cheap and readily available even to the small farmer in the form of rentals; large tract s of lands leads to feudalism which militates against liberty, freedom and development and conspires with the forces of status-quo and militarism as has been demonstrated by the history of Japan and even here in Pakistan. And the biggest falsehood is that all land has been distributed under previous land reforms and there is nothing more left; all farms ownerships are less than 500 acres. It has been acknowledged that there are hundreds if not thousands of landlords who own tens of thousands of acres of land, violating the existing relevant laws. The biggest argument against the land reform is ; who will bell the cat ? The situation on ground is that the landlords are not prepared to even pay income tax on their huge incomes; and the majority of civil and military elite is feudal. Military middle classes are transformed into landed elites through awards and rewards and many other routes. It is argued that one has to either wait for a near catastrophe of the dimensions of 16th December 1971 and the emergence of a Marde-Khuda. Marde Khuda came in 1971, but he conspired with the feudal and launched an anti-industrialist agenda and even strengthened feudalism. And then several Mard or Namarde Khuda came in the form of military dictatorships who probably had the power and wherewithal l to take some drastic land reforms programme, but acted to the contrary finding ready friends among the land lords. However, short of catastrophe and civil war, and without the Marde-Khuda , there are some solutions that we are going to take up in the following. Among political parties, MQM does have anti-feudal agenda, but lacks a land reform commitment and suffers from narrow geographical support. It is possible that in future a political coalition may emerge that may be ready to act on some kind of land reforms programme and taxing the large agricultural incomes.Agriculture and PovertyAgriculture has a share of 26% in Pakistan’s GDP and employs % of the work-force. The sector has a potential of growing at rate of 5% p.a., as it did in 1960s earlier. Low growth rates in the economy in general and in agriculture has significantly contributed to poverty and unemployment. Poverty in Pakistan, as measured in 2007-08, was at 26%, which should have increased in the wake of floods and the economic crisis, and has reportedly returned to the previous high levels of 33-38 % of 2001-2002. Rural poverty has always been high in Pakistan at 40% plus. A major reason for it has been the landlessness and low employment. A good 10.36 % of the rural house-holds are landless peasants and another 57% (35.1 % of total population) are under-employed and under-paid non-farm laborers. Both of these groups could benefit from higher agricultural growth rates, land reforms and land redistribution.Higher growth rates would create employment in farm and non-farm sector and would increase wages and incomes. Both growth and equity policies can be mutually reinforcing. Our argument is that the Livestock sector in Pakistan has a contribution of 47 % in the agricultural output, which has been mostly contributed by small holders or the landless, having 2-5 Buffaloes. If 1-1.5 Acre plots are distributed to this group of the landless and the non-farm workers, under a land reforms scheme, it would contribute to both, output and equity. Similarly, the proposed beneficiary group could also participate in high value horticultural sector, which has been shown to have a growth potential of 5.0% p.a. A reasonable land reform component along with the distribution of state land to the rural and possibly urban poor could go a long way in reducing the endemic poverty in this country. Many recent writings have indicated the destabilizing potential of the rural and urban poverty and disparities. Even the Taliban issue is interpreted as having linkage to poverty and deprivation. This creates a new logic and rationale for land reforms which may not only be restricted to land distribution but should go well beyond towards improving upon the tenure issues. The author would strongly argue against the so-called market efficiency and growth-sans-equity policies for example as in Egypt which have worsened the poverty and inequity conditions.Land Ownership and Utilization in Pakistan__________________________________________________________1) Number of households / population increased by 25% during the two censuses (1990-2000).2) Number of farms increased from 5.071 million to 6.6 million: 1.549 million farms added: an increase of 30.54%; total Farm area increased by only 6.15 %; 0.6% increase p.a.3) Number of farms under 1 hectare (ha) remained almost the same; however, farm area under this category increased by 68.47 %, an addition of 483,000 ha. Percentage of these farms in the total number of farms increased from 27 % to 36%.4) Number of largest farms, 60 ha and more, decreased from 15000 to 14000, a decrease of 1000 farms; area under these farms also decreased from 1.936 million ha to 1.683 million ha a decrease of 15% in area.5) In 1990, 27% farms had 4% of total farm area, while the largest farms (60 ha and more and, less than 0.5 % of the total number of farms) had 10% of the total farm area .In 2000, 36% farms (under 1 ha) had 6% of the total farm area, while large farms had 8% of the total farm area. Has the skewed distribution decreased? In 1990, the large farms’ total area was 2.75 times higher than the total area of small farms( under 1 ha) area, the same ratio decreased to 1.42 times only ; skewed distribution and disparity still quite high ,but appears to have been reduced by almost 100%, under this indicator.6) In Pakistan about, 6.6 Million farming families own 6.6 million farms, over a farm area of 50 million Acres (average size 8 Acres), of which 20% farm area remains uncultivated. 58% Farms or farm house- holds have only 10% of the total farm area, call them very small farmers( under 5 acres); 37% small farmers (5-25 acres) own 47% of the farm area; 5% larger farmers (25-100 acres) own 26% and 0.5% (30,000 families) of super land lords (100 acres plus) own 11% of the total farm areas.7) Some 19% of the total farm area remains uncultivated. In small farms up to 93% of farm land remains cultivated. This percentage goes down with the increase in farm size. At 100 acres plus, roughly one-half (50%) of the land area remains uncultivated and unutilized.8) About 2.6 million acres of farm area in large farm size category remains unutilized, which is under the control of 30,000 super land lord families. Another 1.5 million acres remain uncultivated in 50-100 Acres plot size. Potentially about 2.6-4 million acres (50%) of unutilized farm lands is “distributable”. Two million landless could benefit.Our Land Reforms experience; a reviewAlthough Muslim League Leadership was ‘mostly feudal the latter felt and recognized the popular pressure for land and tenancy reform. Hari Report, Daultana Commission, MLR-54 and MLR-115 have been the major milestones in the land and tenancy reform history in Pakistan. The last move in this respect dates back to 1977, when PM Bhutto announced a new package of reforms including lower ceilings on land and allotment of government land to the poor tenants. Freedom movement and the ideological conflict between the East and the West created and sustained pressures for land reforms in the developing world. Ideological period having gone, the futility of the earlier reforms and the en-trenchment of feudal interest in Pakistan’s body politic are possibly the reasons, why any such move does not get even mentioned these days. There is substantial postwar evidence that the societies which implemented meaningful land reforms, and put an end to feudalism, could transform themselves into the new dynamism required for scientific and industrial growth and development. Taiwan, Korea and Japan are classic exam¬ples. Taiwan and Korea utilized the opportunity created by the exit of Japanese landlords to launch deep and effective land reforms. Pakistan lost this opportunity which was available to it after independence, as many non-Muslim land owners fled the country.The economic rationale for earlier land reforms was based more on optimal considerations and hither-to under-utilization of the lands available with the big land lord. It appears that redistribution impact was much less of a consideration in the view of the planners and decision makers. The political objectives included acquisition of political legitimacy, and shaking and controlling the feudal class through carrot and stick approach and enhancing the political clientele and image among the masses. Ayub Khan’s reforms (MLR 64) put the upper ceiling of irrigated land at 500 acres per family and un-irrigated at 1000 acres per family. Compensation is to be paid through inheritable bond which earned 4% p.a. interest and land was to be redistributed at a price. Bhutto’s reforms (MLR 115) put the upper ceiling at 150 acres irrigated and 300 acres un-irrigated per member of a family. No compensation was to be paid to owners and the land was to be distributed free. Put together, the two land reforms affected about 4% of the land, only half of which was actually transferred to landless. Only about 100,000 farming households 8% of the total (and even much less if landlessness was included) benefitted.A New Land Reform PackageIn Pakistan, 28% of the total landmass is being under cultivation, and huge chunks of land remain unutilized. About 6.6 million households own 6.6 million farms over a total farm area of 50 million acres. Only some 80% of this farm area is actually cultivated. The remaining 20% of the farm area remains uncultivated. Small farms utilize up to 95% of the available farm land, while large farms owned by big and powerful landlords remain uncultivated to the extent of almost 50%.A total of 2.66 million acres of farm area remains uncultivated in the large farm category(100 acres plus). Some 30,000 landlord families could benefit one million plus landless families, if uncultivated land is given away to the latter under some Land Distribution Scheme, if not land reforms exactly. In Land Reforms, usually land is forcibly taken away under legislation or revolution without any compensation.There is also a case for bringing more land under agriculture. Perhaps ten million more acres could be added by new land expansion and development activity probably in the next ten years. This would mean one million acres per year of new land to be transferred to the landless. One would argue, where would the water come from? We are already short of water. We are currently wasting water under existing flood irrigation practices. The new land under the landless families would be from the very beginning on more efficient Drip Irrigation (D.I.), which may be cheap as well as efficient. The landless poor beneficiary would be more inclined and capable to introduce bucket and pipe drip irrigation. He would not have much choice. He does not have many choices in life either.Thus about 14 million acres of land (10 million new and 4 million existing unutilized) could be distributed among the landless over a period of some ten years, benefitting 5-6 million families, with a farm of 2.5 acres each, practically solving the issue of landlessness, if not of poverty totally. Even after getting 2.5 acres, he would not be totally out of the clutch of the grinding poverty. But he would get hope and the tools, to handle the economic problems of his family.Pakistan would need more land under cultivation to feed its ever increasing population, as productivity increases are too far and few in between. The diseconomy of scale, if any, of the small farms should be taken care of by an organized Cooperative movement that could take care of the credit and inputs. Land is the only thing that governments can afford to give free, may be charge some development cost in the long run under a concessionary credit scheme. Land remains on earth. It does not evaporate and does not disappear. It is excellent collateral for the poor. After all if a country belongs to its people, they should all own some piece of land, however, small it may be.Land has been distributed in Pakistan among the rich and powerful and literally given away at dirt prices. Some effort would have to be made to include the poor in this largesse. There is a mass appeal and appetite for land confiscation by the state without compensation. Hence the two attempts at land reforms, even though unsuccessful. Any new land distribution scheme should be careful and respect the federalism requirements and the local and regional rights. It should not import people from the outside, unless in special cases, where demand and supply gaps may exist.On the other hand the big landlords may be induced by the State to do away with their excess unutilized land by imposing a variety of taxes including the much dreaded and opposed Income Tax .Excess land can be acquired by provincial governments under a land bond scheme carrying a reasonable interest rate. The poor land allotee may also be required to pay off a part of the land price under a concessionary credit scheme. Similar schemes have been implemented in Japan, Korea and Germany immediately after the Second World War of 1945.Landless peasants can be given a 1-2 Acre farm each, at 50% of the purchase cost under 4% p.a. and 20 yrs repayment. Alternatively GOP and provincial governments could develop 2-4 million acres over a period of 7-10 yrs, possibly under budgetary outlay than the procurement of private land. Government of Sindh is already implementing such a programme at a modest scale by converting kutcha forest land but without forest, to agricultural land and distributing among landless. This can be done with much ease in Balochistan, where large tracts of land remain unutilized. For political and possibly good reasons, land in Balochistan can only go to Baloch and hence only 1.0 million families could benefit .Almost all the house holds in Balochistan could get a reasonably sized farm. In Punjab, the problem is difficult due to large population and in NWFP the land is limited, although in both the cases there are less populated areas tribal belt in NWFP and southern Punjab. Instead of giving lands to reward generals and bureaucrats and large real state investors, the scarce land should go to the landless poor.Land is the only thing governments, mostly provincial, have. Budgetary resources are limited and cannot almost always be enough, be it BISP or Zakat fund.The cultivable waste landThere was a total of 8.22 million ha of cultivable waste land available to be cultivated, perhaps all of it government land, almost half of it (3.97 Million ha) is in Balochistan. There are only 1.163 million households in Balochistan. If this land is distributed, every house-hold in Balochistan gets 3.41 ha (8.5 acres), much more land than most of the household in Punjab. One doesn’t have to take it away from some one; The Government and the province of Balochistan have this with themselves. Likewise, KP has 1.21 million ha of cultivable waste land, and only 2.77 million house-holds. KP has a land area problem, and about 0.5 ha (1.25 acres) could be distributed to every family in KP. Some 1.29 million farms in the country are under 0.5 ha. It is better than being totally landless. Some of the allotted lands would be sold, because every one cannot enter into agriculture. Ultimately, if 50% of the house-holds end up selling the allotted land, the average farm size increases to 1 ha, which should be quite sufficient to produce food for a family or produce products of an equivalent value. Alternatively, GoKP could allot the available wasteland to 50% of the families, to get the same result. In Sindh and Punjab, landless are high in number and the available cultivable wasteland much less. Nevertheless, 1.6 million ha of this land available in Punjab could be distributed among 3 million households. Similarly, in Sindh, 1.44 million ha could go to another 2 million house holds. A total of 6 million households, out of a total of 14 million rural households can thus get land, without resorting to redistribution. There is a big if in it. The land may not have been grabbed already by the powerful. It has come to public light only after the floods that in Sindh; most of the sailabi land had been grabbed by the powerful landlords, and had been put to share-cropping.Times have changed. Today’s reports of World Bank and IMF and other western agencies read like communist manifesto. The kind of poverty and hunger eradication literature that is coming out now for more than two decades would have sent the writers and publishers of those writings to jail or severe marginalization, in 1950s, 60s and even 70s.Today the biggest enemy or adversary of the World powers is religious fundamentalism and extremism and has replaced the erstwhile Communism. Let me quote here from a report compiled under the aegis of USAID. Ironically, USAID and the World Bank have supported land reforms in the past in many strife prone regions. Taliban issue seems to have created a new rationale for land reforms among the donor agencies. It is being argued that Talibans may exploit the issue and would most probably be successful in drawing support from the landless poor farmers and enhance their appeal and domain. There is significant evidence that most of the Talibans and their supporters come from the landless class.There are other options and components of reform programme as well that extend to water rights and urban housing schemes. Under new irrigation schemes, whenever these come up, trade-able water rights could be awarded to the landless, which he could sell to the willing customer or use it as his collateral or share in the distribution of agricultural output and profits. In this way he becomes partner in place of surf.In urban land laws, provisions for high -rise building societies could be introduced, where virtual plots in the third dimensions are allot-able. Real state developers could be encouraged to develop multi-purpose projects, where in lieu of subsidized land or free land use conversion, a certain percentage of 3-D plots are allotted to the poor. Currently a lot of money changes hands on conversion of agricultural or residential land to the commercial one. Some fee does go to the local or provincial government but most of the surplus is siphoned away by the builders, landowners and the social and political elite. So the name of the game is to create policy or innovation surplus and divert it to the poor.There is a lot of government land that is available on the periphery of Karachi near Sohrab Goth (outside Karachi limits) and in district Thatta that could be allotted to the flood victims especially from the inundated towns of Jacobabad, Larkana and Thatta. If Sindh has to develop regional economies are to be established, as has happened around Lahore. Karachi itself would benefit from the regional economic development as Lahore has. Karachi’s’ economy has been stagnating for many years now. One of the reasons is lack of close geographical interactions and resource reservoirs. Every body would benefit. However the idea would fail if it is used for political and ethnic manipulation and advantage.I would like to add a caveat here. Last PML (N) government headed by Mr. Nawaz Sharif introduced an innovative housing policy and strategy for urban areas by transferring surplus government land and plots for low-cost public housing projects. A good innovative project was, however, reportedly marred by construction scams. There was no need of involving government in construction by a party which believes so much in private sector. That project perhaps is revived in one form or the other. Some residual land or assets may still be there. Musharraf government quietly put a lid on it. No NAB case has been filed with respect to this project apparently. May be, there is one or a few. I am not sure.These are excepts from the writers forthcoming book; Pakistan’s development :economy, resources and technology

By Eqbal Ahmed:

After the publication of a letter in The New York Times (April 10, 1971) signed by me jointly with three other West Pakistani scholars and after subsequent statements of mine opposing the Pakistani military government’s intervention in East Bengal, several Pakistani officials protested my position. They all pointed out that: 1) The army, under General Yahya, is only protecting national integrity against a secessionist movement which would cause the 70 million people in East Pakistan to break away from the 56 million in West Pakistan; 2) The army intervened only after the Bengali nationalists had started killing West Pakistani residents in East Pakistan and the minority Bihari refugees from India; 3) Since the leaders of the Awami League of East Pakistan have pro-Western sympathies and connections, and the Chinese “support” the federal government, anti-imperialist and radical elements should not oppose the military’s action. The following is a reply to one such “friend”.

Dear——

I hope you understand that it was not easy for me and my brother Saghir Ahmad to publish the statement you saw in The New York Times (April 10, 1971). First, I did not have any natural sympathy for the Bangla Desh movement. In fact, I had a definite feeling of antipathy for Sheikh Mujib [East Pakistan’s leader whose party, the Awami League, won a governing majority in the national assembly and 98 percent of Bengali votes]. He impressed me as being a limited man, impetuous and unimaginative. But then I have less regard for his West Pakistani counterparts—the miserable Mr. Bhutto who changes his politics like a lizard his color, or the generals who, bred by colonial Britain and armed by the USA, appear bent on turning the country into a Muslim version of Greece and Spain.

Secondly, as you know, I am originally from Bihar, and most of my people had migrated to East Pakistan. Several of them were killed by Bengali zealots during the period immediately preceding the military’s intervention. Furthermore, I grew up during the Movement for Pakistan, and it is hard not to cherish the idea of national unity. Lastly, as a radical and an internationalist, I do not believe that separatist movements constitute a forward step in the right direction. For these reasons, my inclinations should be to support a policy of maintaining the integrity of Pakistan.

However, as I see the facts surrounding recent developments, I am able to find neither a political and economic nor a moral justification for the current policy of military intervention. I have been examining the facts as closely as it is possible to do, given the censorship of news by the military regime and the resulting imbalances in news reports, some of which necessarily emanate from India.

My considered opinion is that:

1) The East Pakistanis had genuine grievances against the federal government, dominated by the military since at least 1957. Not even the most hawkish West Pakistanis deny the gross economic inequities and exploitation suffered by the Bengalis. Politically, twelve years of direct military rule deprived them of even a minor share in the exercise of power.

2) The nearly unanimous electoral support for the Awami League’s demand for provincial autonomy was the result of the neglect of East Pakistan, climaxing in the example of the incredible negligence in the relief of cyclone victims last November. I recognize that the poor in West Pakistan have suffered also. The callousness of our rulers may be undiscriminating. Yet the more disadvantaged people of East Pakistan could only comprehend their condition as caused by regional discrimination.

3) Having failed to arrive at an extra-parliamentary settlement, the military, supported by West Pakistani leaders, intervened on March 25, 1971, to offset the results of Pakistan’s first freely held elections. Perhaps the army had little hope of obtaining the capitulation of Pakistan’s elected representatives. It is now clear that the army used the negotiations between General Yahya and Sheikh Mujib as a cover to prepare for its intervention.

4) There is absolutely no popular base of support for the federal government. Even after four months of terror it has been unable to produce a group of political quislings capable of lending some legitimacy to the army’s occupation.

5) While the military has the power to lord over East Pakistan, the cost of this colonization will be very high for the peoples of both East and West. For the latter it must include increasing economic hardships, militarization of our politics and society, and total denial of civil liberties. The closing of journals like Asad andLail-O-Nahar, the recent jailing without trial in West Pakistan of 800 persons, including leaders like Afzal Bangash, Mukhtar Rana, and G.M. Syed, intellectuals like Abdullah Malik and Sheikh Ayaz, academicians like G.M. Shah, and the recent public floggings of dissenters against the government in Lyalpur and Sialkot are indicative of the shift toward totalitarianism.

Similarly I worry over the statements and editorials which provoke public paranoia by suggesting an Indian-Jewish-American conspiracy in this conflict. This, regardless of the fact that with arms and money the American government is underwriting the murderous mission of the military dictatorship. Above all I am distressed by the promotion of religious fundamentalism and the systematic killing and harassment by the army of our Hindu citizens. I shudder when I think of the repercussions this policy may have for the 80 million Moslems in India.

6) Unless there is an immediate end to military rule in East Pakistan, famine and pestilence as well as periodic massacres by the army will cost millions of lives in the coming months. The intervention has already caused an estimated 250,000 deaths of unarmed civilians. Six million refugees have reached India. Between 60,000 and 100,000 are arriving daily and are facing infection from cholera and the hostility of poor Indians. Millions languish in the interior of East Pakistan, hungry and terrorized, potential statistics in what threatens to become the greatest holocaust in history.

As you know, the balance of survival is delicate in East Pakistan. Minor disruptions often cause major tragedies. Nineteen seventy and 1971 have been particularly hard years. The floods last August and September were the worst of the last decade and destroyed about half a million tons of rice. The cyclone in November, the most severe of the century, destroyed an equal amount of rice and rendered one thousand square miles of rice lands uncultivable for at least one year.

Then the army, in an effort to deny supplies to the Bengali opposition, started confiscating and burning the food reserves. Many displaced or frightened peasants in the villages have not harvested the winter crop. The combined losses, amounting to about 2.5 million tons of rice, must be replaced immediately if mass starvation is to be prevented. The recent survey by the World Bank, as well as the disclosures by Senator Kennedy of suppressed State Department reports, indicate that Western and US officials in East Pakistan have been warning Washington of the “specter of famine.”

Others have been more concrete in their predictions. Three months ago, Iain MacDonald, Relief Coordinator for Oxfam and other agencies, warned that 1.5 million persons may face starvation. Recently the Financial Times of Londonestimated that possibly four million would die unless relief and reconstruction were speedily begun. Alan Hart, a BBC reporter, believes it “probable that twenty or more million East Pakistanis will be starving by September or October.”

The dispatch of more supplies for relief is by itself unlikely to avert the impending tragedy. Only a quick restoration of civilian rule can prevent the use of food grains and medicine as military weapons; and only such a restoration can ensure both the distribution of relief and an effective role for international agencies in the administration of such relief.

7) Lastly, I should stress that no genuine restoration of civilian government will be possible until the East Pakistanis have been conceded their right to autonomy or even secession.

For these reasons, I believe that the only workable course for West Pakistanis is to insist on immediate and unconditional termination of martial law, the convening of the duly elected national assembly, and a commitment that the majority decisions of that assembly shall be binding on all, even if these decisions dismember Pakistan as a state consisting of East and West. We must reject the army’s absurd claim that it has intervened to protect the nation’s “integrity” from the party that had just won, in Pakistan’s only freely held elections, a governing majority in the national assembly.

In fact, the elected representatives of East Pakistan had insisted only on fulfilling their mandate to achieve autonomy for their province. The proclamation by the East Pakistanis of the independent state of Bangla Desh took place only after the army refused to convene the national assembly and after it had brutally intervened in East Pakistan on March 25, 1971. In his speech of June 28, General Yahya denied the right of the national constituent assembly to draw up a constitution and he harshly attacked all the leaders of the Awami League. This destroyed the possibility of any settlement based on the mandate of the elections.

I know that I shall be condemned for my position. For someone who is facing a serious trial in America, it is not easy to confront one’s own government. Yet it is not possible for me to oppose American crimes in Southeast Asia or Indian occupation of Kashmir while accepting the crimes that my government is committing against the people of East Pakistan. Although I mourn the death of Biharis by Bengali vigilantes, and condemn the irresponsibilities of the Awami League, I am not willing to equate their actions with that of the government and the criminal acts of an organized, professional army.

According to reliable reports, which were not challenged by the government, no more than 10,000 persons were killed or wounded by Bengali nationalists in the riots against the Biharis. At the beginning of August, however, West Pakistan military authorities issued a white paper which claimed that 100,000 people were killed by the Bengali opposition. These and other exaggerated claims in the white paper were obviously intended to justify trials and possible death sentences for opposition leaders. As this letter is being written, the military government has announced that Sheikh Mujib will face a secret military tribunal on August 12, on charges of “waging war” against Pakistan. Since the white paper announced that seventy-nine members of the unconvened national assembly will face criminal charges, Mujib’s trial may foreshadow more secret prosecutions.

I know that the army did not intervene in East Pakistan to stop the killing of non-Bengalis, which went on for three weeks while the generals pretended to seek extra-parliamentary deals with the politicians. Saving civilian lives was not the motive behind the vast repressions that have already cost countless Pakistanis their lives and property and forced millions to flee to India. Unequal bartering of brutalities is not a function of responsible government. The very fact that this military regime seeks justification for its behavior by referring to the excesses of the Awami League and the aroused masses is a measure of the steep decline in the civic standards of our army and civil services. Above all, criminality is not a commercial proposition: one cannot deposit the crimes of one into the account of another.

The Chinese rhetoric on this issue is irrelevant. They have offered Pakistan their support only against foreign interference; and indicated their belief that this conflict is an internal matter. Much more alarming is the American government’s decision to continue armaments sales and economic aid to the dictatorship, despite the unanimous opposition of its Western allies, of important men in the Congress, and of the World Bank. This is particularly striking in view of the long-standing loyalty to the West and to the US of Sheikh Mujib and his party.

Washington’s assistance to the West Pakistan junta should be a lesson to those Pakistanis who believed that the US, given a choice between militarists and moderate democrats, would choose the latter. The leaders of the Awami League in East Pakistan failed to understand how important West Pakistan was to the Nixon-Kissinger strategy of building an informal anti-Soviet alliance of dependable clients around the Mediterranean and Indian oceans—from Spain and Portugal, through Greece and Israel, to Iran and Pakistan.

It has been said that General Yahya is now being rewarded by US support for having arranged Mr. Kissinger’s recent mission to China. If this is so, then the Chinese-American detente will have started by being detrimental to the weak and poor in Asia. Whatever the reasons for US policy, however, one effect is clear: Americans have become silent accomplices in crimes against humanity in yet another part of Asia. But their obligations are not as urgent as yours and mine.

I should also stress that the recent developments strengthen the possibility of a war between India and Pakistan. The two countries are more and more becoming pawns in world politics. India and the USSR have now signed a twenty-year friendship pact in which Russia promises to give military assistance to India in the event of war with Pakistan. This treaty cancels the gains that Pakistan had made at the Tashkent conference in 1966, when the Russians promised both to give aid to Pakistan and to be neutral in India-Pakistan relations.

I do not know if my position would at all contribute to a humane settlement. Given the fact that our government is neither accountable to the public nor sensitive to the opinion of mankind, our protest may have no effect until this regime has exhausted all its assets and taken the country down the road to moral, political, and economic bankruptcy. However, lack of success does not justify the crime of silence in the face of criminal, arbitrary power.

Source:http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1971/sep/02/letter-to-a-pakistani-diplomat/?pagination=false

On May 2nd U.S. special forces entered deep inside Pakistan’s territory, effectively killing world’s most wanted terrorist, and leaving undetected. This raid by some is considered a breach of Pakistan’s national sovereignty. Although there are arguments which suggest that Pakistan’s sovereignty has already been compromised by the presence of Osama Bin Laden, banned organizations, and wanted terrorists. Making it a fair game for international forces to chase them inside Pakistan.

Also it is only considered a breach of sovereignty when there is a “use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state,” according to the United Nations Charter. As far as the U.S. raid(s) in Pakistan are concerned, none of them were for the purpose of overthrow of Pakistan’s government, or to change Pakistan’s territorial borders.

If examined deeper, sovereignty seems to be a vague issue. Especially in today’s world it’s really a subjective and almost non existent argument. With rapidly growing influence of globalization in our societies and international treaties that are meant to eradicate borders and national sovereignty for greater global good, the importance of sovereignty has been replaced by the importance of peace and prosperity.

So when it comes to global world and greater interests no nation is truly sovereign. As we become increasingly globalized our interests are highly intertwined, we become highly dependent on one another. Each nation is no longer an independent sovereign nation, but rather a citizen of a global world. Being a global citizen comes with rights and responsibilities of citizenship. Some of which include protecting the environment that is shared by everyone and helping to keep the world safer and free of terrorism.

Organizations like United Nations, World Bank, World Trade Organization, International Monetary Fund, and treaties like NAFTA, EU, and Euro Zones are all a part of this decreasing national sovereignty and increasing interdependence. These treaties and contracts amongst nations are formed mainly to integrate their economies, but also to have regional and global political security and a deterrence against war.

When countries group together like the European Union, they not only integrate their economies but also enhance their political weight in the world. Many Europeans believed that after World War II the European nation-states were no longer large enough to hold their own world markets and world politics. There was a need for a united Europe to deal with the United States and the Soviet Union. Hence a union was formed, which not only became a world’s largest economic giant, but also a political power, and a prosperous war free region.

With the recent financial crises, unions like Euro Zone are looking towards more integration and less sovereignty, rather than independence and individuality. They are heading towards becoming a fiscal union rather than merely a monetary one. This sort of action would make them equivalent to the U.S. model.

As a member of United Nations Pakistan has also given up its sovereignty to the rules, regulations, and the decisions of the UN’s body. Pakistan as a member of UN has to comply with United Nation’s charter and follow its guidance on laws, especially when it relates to human rights issues. Hence Pakistan’s sovereignty doesn’t fully exist the way it’s thought to be by some commentators in Pakistan.

Same is true for Pakistan under the International Monetary Fund’s guidelines and World Trade Organization’s restrictions. Pakistan does not have the freedom to implement any sort of fiscal and monetary policy that isn’t approved by those organizations. This also puts restrictions on what Pakistan trades and how it trades with other nations.

These are the issues Pakistan needs to analyze further as a nation. Whether they want to live as an isolated nation or join the ranks of many in becoming a truly global country. This would mean toning down the rhetoric on sovereignty and becoming integrated in the global economies and politics.

“Human Security Is The Primary Purpose Of Organizing A State In The Beginning.”
– Surin Pitsuwan, ASEAN

In the wake of the Arab Spring, and in light of the ongoing global economic disorder, world leaders would be well advised to examine their understanding of national security. Recent events paint a picture of national leaders who are wildly out of touch and hopelessly behind the principal national challenge of the 21st century – human security.

(Source: Newsweek)

In 2011, the world witnessed the sudden and total political implosion of a handful of states that up until recently were firmly in the hands of their autocratic rulers. There was much debate about how the warning signs and red flags were missed. Clearly, N. African leaders were out of touch and not able to sense the social fissures and stress points that indicated popular rage.

Though one of the core lessons of the Arab revolts is that super angry citizens now have virtual meeting grounds to vent, meet, organize and to act, the most memorable lesson of the revolts is that governments must provide for the legitimate needs of their people or face ouster. Authorities must quickly learn that protecting their people from state on state conflict or homeland attacks (i.e. Freedom of Fear), must be balanced with the human requirement for the basics, or what social scientists call “Freedom of Want” (think shelter, food, clean water etc.). In most societies, this need is satisfied when people are productively employed in the economy and basic goods/services are made available through a combination of social programs and a healthy private sector. Mubarak, Gadaffi, and other modern day pharaohs simply failed to effectively work with the ‘whole of society’ to deliver on their respective “Freedom of Want” promises.

From Pharaoh to Prisoner (Source: Newsweek)

As we prepare to start a new year, basic food prices across the globe remain at historically high levels and although great strides have been made in the anti-poverty fight, the numbers are still staggering.

• Approximately 9.2 million children under the age of 5 die each year, mostly from preventable diseases. That’s approximately 25,000 children each day.
• 69 million children are out of school around the world, a figure equivalent to the entire primary school-aged population in Europe andNorth America.
• Food prices have risen 83 percent since 2005, disproportionately affecting those in poverty who spend a higher percentage of their income on food.
• Daily disasters. HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria—all treatable diseases—claim the lives of over 8,000 people every day in Africa due to lack of access to health care.
• More than 800 million people go to bed hungry every day…300 million are children.

(Statistics are from the World Bank and the ONE Campaign)

To make matters worse, the global economic recovery continues to stall with very little sign that industrialized nations have a solid game plan to get the ball closer to the goal line. Sadly, even with this bleak economic reality, developing nations today account for the majority of arms purchases in the world, buying arms supplied mainly by the permanent UN Security Council members—the USA, UK, France, Russia, and China. Yes, I know what you’re thinking.

So while the international community and mainstream media focus their collective attention on containing the nuclear genie, nations that can least provide human security for their people purchase conventional weapons from the countries that claim to want world peace and social development.  Perhaps all should heed a warning from Thomas Jefferson who once said, “When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people, there is liberty”.

Presidents and Prime Ministers — Fear And Respect Your People!

The year is certainly not over yet – the annual international UN climate conference is ongoing in South Africa for the next ten days.  Nevertheless, here’s a quick look at what we’ve seen – and what we might expect in 2012.

Casting back to my look at 2010 and beyond, I predicted witch hunts from the new Republican majority in the House of Representatives, attempts to block progress on climate and energy, and little or no forward progress from the new Congress.  That’s what we saw.  Still, a few weeks after my end-of-year article, I calculated the state of play early in the new year, finding what UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner called “silent momentum on climate change.”

So, in 2011, the momentum got louder.  Here are a few highlights:

• The progress this past year has been steady and dramatic on renewable energy deployments.  From China to Europe to the US, wind farms and solar panels are proliferating; finance continues to flow to clean tech.  The IPCC published a comprehensive and highly positive look at the state of play on renewables:  Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (SRREN).
• The IPCC issued another special report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX).
• California and Australia both pushed their comprehensive GHG-reduction laws substantially forward.
• The new Republican majority in the House of Representatives, as predicted, tried every which way to slow down or neuter existing environmental laws and the EPA’s regulatory regime to control greenhouse gases, but with little success.
• Here in the US, considerable movement keeps happening with automotive gas mileage, driven – as it were – by the Obama Administration, while other federal government initiatives are further pushing the edge of the envelope – and spectacularly from the Department of Defense.
• The activist movements to stop coal plants, slow down mountaintop removal mining, and put a boot to the development of Alberta tar sands and the Keystone XL pipeline all gained further traction.

The most unexpected event was the devastating tsunami that hit Japan and triggered a horrific series of accidents at the nuclear power plant complex at Fukushima.  There was then a not-surprising, highly rational rising rejection of nuclear power going forward, from Germany, Italy, Switzerland, Japan and beyond.

I would single out the writer and activist Bill McKibben and his group 350.org for special recognition.  Not only did they catalyze amazing consciousness-raising global events like “Moving Planet” but they were the power behind an unprecedented display of commitment, in the form of civil disobedience that took place in Washington to protest the Keystone XL pipeline in August, then another demonstration, surrounding the White House, that so captured the President’s attention that he postponed a federal decision on this terrible project for at least a year – maybe killing it.

With the death of Wangari Maathai, the world sustainability movement suffered a great loss.

I would certainly recommend Diet for a Hot Planet by Anna Lappé as a great read for anyone who wants to not only help turn the situation around as the climate continues to change for the worse, but who might also wish to save agriculture, live in a significantly more economically and socially just world, and, not incidentally, eat a lot more sanely.  (See also Jonathan Safran Foer’s Eating Animals from a couple of years ago.)

What do I think will happen this coming year?  Republicans will keep on keeping on trying to kill progress on greenhouse gas regulation under the Clean Air Act – and fail.  Barack Obama will be re-elected and the steady forward momentum on clean tech and environmental regulation that his first administration engendered will continue.  China, India and other rapidly emerging economies will accelerate the uptake of renewable energy technologies, as will the Europeans, Japanese, the US and others in the developed economies.  Multilateral regimes such as the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, multilateral development banks like the World Bank, and major bilateral arrangements such as those between Norway and Brazil and Norway and Indonesia will continue to advance programs to finance mitigation of greenhouse gases and adaptation to climate change.

What I am not able to predict is whether or not the enormous progress that we’re making on climate, energy and sustainability is coming in time and with sufficient force and focus to save the planet from a very bleak future ecology indeed.  Whatever the outcome, though, we absolutely must push forward and support the wonderful positive changes that have been taking place.