Syrian angst

Voice of sanity appears to be struggling for audience in Syria. The Arab spring has clearly left deathly trails in this Middle-East country so much so that a civil war may not be ruled out. The world community is rightly shocked to see the extent of humanitarian crisis in Syria.

Though the Arab Spring accounted for a near peaceful end to totalitarian rules in Tunisia and Egypt, the massive loss of human lives in Libya should act as a caution for the western world and Arab League apparently seeking a swift regime change in Syria. Regime change through external intervention is clearly not in sync with the spirit of Arab Spring.

Even as leaders of a host of nations gather in Tunisia to find a way out to curb the violence in Syria, their immediate challenge should be win a ceasefire. This should be uppermost in the agenda of the leaders, as reports coming out from Syria clearly tell a sickening tale.

Worse is unabated loss of lives of journalists in Syria, with the popular saying, that you should not shoot the messenger, clearly having no takers. One must commend the valour of journalists who have sneaked into Syria to inform the world of the scale of humanitarian crisis unfolding there. Amidst strict clampdown against foreign journalists, reporters are staking their lives to sneak into Syria from Lebanan and Turkey through local contacts.

The opposition Local Coordination Committees of Syria has pegged death toll in Syria at about 9,000 so far. Reports suggest that the besieged city of Homs is witnessing unprecedented violence. The UN officials have, however, said that they are not in a position to update death tolls in Syria. Besides, residents in Homs are stated to be without critical supplies for weeks and are unable to move to other city. It’s said that the Syrian army is shelling the city of Homs and people are starving as well.

Therefore, the International Committee of the Red Cross has rightly sought from authorities and rebels to agree for daily ceasefires so that life-saving aid can reach civilians in hard-hit areas, including Homs. "It should last at least two hours every day, so that ICRC staff and Syrian Arab Red Crescent volunteers have enough time to deliver aid and evacuate the wounded and the sick," quote unquote ICRC President Jakob Kellenberger.

Even as the Arab League wants the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to quit his position, there appears no consensus till date among the western powers on the way ahead. While Morocco wants the rebels in Syria to be armed, which the US has not ruled out as an option, France has called for a NATO led air cover to reach out the humanitarian assistance. The Arab League has already imposed economic sanctions against Syria. However, China and Russia vetoed United Nations resolutions two times which were aimed to end violence in Syria. India has also expressed reservations, while citing example of Libya, that the UN principle of responsibility to protect is being selectively used to promote national interests and bring about regime change in the conflict countries instead of saving civilians.

The US is least likely to get militarily engaged in Syria in an election year, as its extended stay in Iraq had been openly questioned by the people. Iran, which is a firm ally of Assad, has apparently sent two warships in the backyard of Syria in a bid to provide training for Syrian naval forces. Experts assess that Iranian involvement in Syrian crisis could drag in other unwilling nations to back the rebels.

Besides, Russia and China back Assad's own program for reforms, which include plans for a referendum on a new constitution and elections. While Assad says that this should satisfy demands for more democracy, his opponents say the proposals are a sham. Assad’s assertions that the 11-month-old uprising against his rule is limited to the provinces are also not seen credible, as violence is reportedly taking place right in the Syrian capital of Damascus.

It’s worth mentioning that much of the opposition to Assad comes from the Sunni majority, while his support comes from minorities, including his Alawite sect. There is enough credence to the concerns of the neighbouring countries that violence could take on a sectarian slant.

Therefore, the western world and the Arab League need to practice the utmost caution and find a way out for peaceful negotiations for political resolution. The UN chief Ban Ki-moon has rightly said that he was searching for a candidate to name as a humanitarian coordinator for Syria, whose role could evolve into seeking a political solution to the conflict. There should be no second opinion, that the humanitarian support should be first reached out to the people and for that a ceasefire is a must.

Pakistan awaits Arab spring

The Arab spring was clearly the defining moment of the last year, which continues to find echo in all parts of the world. Even in Myanmar the military junta appears to have realized for better that the time for democracy has arrived and could not be further avoided.

So, when people all around the world yearn for true democracy, Pakistan too cannot remain unaffected. Therefore, it’s quite understandable why Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani is so anguished for the nation still lagging behind in establishing a fully functional democratic set up. He rightly lamented the fact that while vibrant democracy thrives in India no elected government has been allowed to complete its term in Pakistan for many years. This is truly a very sad commentary on Pakistan’s state of affairs.

The world profusely prides in India’s vibrant democracy, which thrives on strong institutions and constitutionally defined separation of power. Executive, judiciary and legislature in India have done well tostay in their respective domains and honour rights of other institutions. Sadly, healthy democratic set up appears to be the missing link in Pakistan’s democracy. The overzealous indulgence by Pakistani army in the affairs of other institutions has been seen as the sole reason for weakening of democracy.

So, one can understand Gilani’s anguish when he said that though India and Pakistan were created on the same date, there was a stark difference in how they have continued with their democratic systems.

It’s noteworthy to mention that democracy has never been able to institutionalise in Pakistan, as the country witnessed a series of military coups starting from 1958. Besides, memories of last coup by Pervez Musharraf's overthrow of Nawaz Sharif's elected government in 1999 still remain fresh. The pitfalls of Pakistan having been under several decades of military rule are for all to see.

However, Gilani clearly gives a sense, that the struggle for democratic ways of life is still going on in Pakistan and one would wish all the success to the civil society there. The provocation for Gilani’s lamentation has apparently been due to his apprehensions of a number of conspiracies being hatched in the country to undermine his government. Notwithstanding internal squabbles in Pakistan, Gilani would do well to keep the fight for democracy alive. In fact, the era of military coups are now part of history.

Besides, Gilani deserves accolade for speaking his mind frankly and freely. In fact, true testimony of a leader is whether he can tell the people not what they want to listen to but what he thinks is right for them.

Therefore, Gilani quite rightly pointed out to the people in Pakistan that the country cannot afford to have wars in 21st century. This statement of fact is quite commendable, knowing well that Jehadi elements clearly backed by Pakistan’s agencies related to military openly indulge in war mongering on the issue of Kashmir. Pakistan has waged four wars on India on the issue of Kashmir, with the last one through intrusion in Kargil still being fresh in the minds of the people.

The Pakistani premier quite rightly stated that any issue, including Kashmir, has to be resolved through dialogue and diplomacy. While Gilani spelt out the reality, the message to Pakistani military is also quite apparent, that its grounds for intruding into democratic institutions are now obsolete and it should limit itself to its brief only. Experts have rightly diagnosed that the Pakistani army had been exploiting sentiments of the people by feeding anti-India hysteria there.

In fact, Gilani appears to be taking the bull by its horn, as he clearly stated that it was the democratic government, which closed NATO supply lines, got the US to vacate Shamsi airbase and boycotted the Bonn Conference on Afghanistan after NATO attack on Pakistani border. In the same breath, he also reminded that there were question marks about Pakistan's policy on Afghanistan as it was made by a dictator who wore four hats of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, the army chief, the President and the Chief Executive in a veiled reference to Parvez Musharaff.

Pakistan would rather do well to take note of the way how Bangladesh has embarked on nation building by single mindedly focusing on socio-economic advancement of its people, while also scripting a win-win partnership with India.

In nutshell 21st century has no place for war and hysteria and rather it’s for partnership and peaceful co-existence. Pakistani civil society has quite commendably been vocal in the recent past for its rights. Pakistan has to find a way out of the gray areas, which allow other institutions to trample with democratic ways of governance as a step forward.