August 2010′s B-side
August 2010′s B-side looks at Pakistan’s impending water shortage crisis which is shocking given Pakistan is overflowing in water at present. The remaining focus for the B-side centres on British Prime Minister David Cameron’s crude comments against Pakistan. August 2010′s B-side contents are:
- Drowning Today, Parched Tomorrow by STEPHEN SOLOMON
- The PM Should Listen More and Talk Less by DAVID MILIBAND
- PM Spoke As True Friend of Pakistan by SAYEEDA WARSI
The first article is an article written by Stephen Solomon and looks at Pakistan’s impending doom. as sadly more doom awaits us owing to Pakistan’s water shortage crisis.
Drowning Today, Parched Tomorrow by Stephen Solomon
Hard as it may be to believe when you see the images of the monsoon floods that are now devastating Pakistan, the country is actually on the verge of a critical shortage of fresh water. And water scarcity is not only a worry for Pakistan’s population — it is a threat to America’s national security as well.
Given the rapid melting of the Himalayan glaciers that feed the Indus River — a possible contributor to the current floods — and growing tensions with upriver archenemy India about use of the river’s tributaries, it’s unlikely that Pakistani food production will long keep pace with the growing population.
It’s no surprise, then, that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made Pakistani headlines a few weeks before the flooding by unveiling major water projects aimed at bolstering national storage capacity, irrigation, safe drinking water and faltering electrical power service under America’s new $7.5 billion assistance program. In March, the State Department announced that water scarcity had been upgraded to “a central U.S. foreign policy concern.” Pakistan is at the center of it.
This is because a widespread water shortage in Pakistan would further destabilize the fractious country, hurting its efforts to root out its resident international terrorists. The struggle for water could also become a tipping point for renewed war with India. The jihadists know how important the issue is: in April 2009, Taliban forces launched an offensive that got within 35 miles of the giant Tarbela Dam, the linchpin of Pakistan’s hydroelectric and irrigation system.
Pakistan needs to rebuild and overhaul the administration of the world’s largest contiguous irrigation network. For decades, Islamabad has spent far too little on basic maintenance, drainage and distribution canals, new water storage and hydropower plants.
To some extent, these deficiencies have been masked since the 1970s by farmers drilling hundreds of thousands of little tube wells, which now provide half of the country’s irrigation. But in many of these places the groundwater is running dry and becoming too salty for use. The result is an agricultural crisis of wasted water, inefficient production and incipient crop shortfalls.
Like Egypt on the Nile, arid Pakistan is totally reliant on the Indus and its tributaries. Yet the river’s water is already so overdrawn that it no longer reaches the sea, dribbling to a meager end near the Indian Ocean port of Karachi. Its once-fertile delta of rice paddies and fisheries has shriveled up.
Chronic water shortages in the southern province of Sindh breed suspicions that politically connected landowners in upriver Punjab are siphoning more than their allotted share. There have been repeated riots over lack of water and electricity in Karachi, and across the country people suffer from contaminated drinking water, poor sanitation and pollution.
The future looks grim. Pakistan’s population is expected to rise to 220 million over the next decade, up from around 170 million today. Yet, eventually, flows of the Indus are expected to decrease as global warming causes the Himalayan glaciers to retreat, while monsoons will get more intense. Terrifyingly, Pakistan only has the capacity to hold a 30-day reserve storage of water as a buffer against drought.
India, meanwhile, is straining the limits of the Indus Waters Treaty, a 1960 agreement on sharing the river system. To cope with its own severe electricity shortages, it is building a series of hydropower dams on Indus tributaries in Jammu and Kashmir State, where the rivers emerge from the Himalayas.
While technically permissible under the treaty provided the overall volumes flowing downstream aren’t diminished, untimely dam-filling by India during planting season could destroy Pakistan’s harvest. Pakistan, downriver and militarily weaker than India, understandably regards the dams’ cumulative one-month storage capacity as a potentially lethal new water weapon in India’s arsenal.
Now, on top of all this, come the monsoon floods, which have obliterated countless canals, diversion weirs and huge swaths of cropland. Pakistan needs help, and projects like those heralded by Secretary Clinton, while valuable, are not on the scale needed to turn things around.
The best first step is a huge one: for Washington to kick-start progress on the Diamer-Bhasha dam, an agricultural and hydroelectric project on the Indus that’s been on the drawing board for decades. The project, likely to cost more than $12 billion, has languished for want of financing. It has also has run afoul of the developed world’s knee-jerk disfavor of giant dams.
But there is simply no other project that can add so much desperately needed water storage and hydroelectricity — Pakistan is tapping just 12 percent of its hydropower potential. Giant dams, moreover, can be inspiring, iconic projects — the Hoover Dam was a statement of American fortitude at the height of the Depression. Beleaguered Pakistan could use a symbol of progress.
There are other projects, already shown to be successful, that on a larger scale could save more water than building half a dozen giant dams. Managers at one Punjabi canal branch, for example, are working with international experts to replace the traditional supply system called warabandi — in which farmers draw water on a simple rotational basis — with one that requires less overall water but delivers it on a reliable, as-needed basis.
Finally, President Obama should take a lesson from John F. Kennedy. In 1961 President Kennedy and President Ayub Khan of Pakistan established a technical collaboration between American experts and a young generation of Pakistani engineers who, together, largely ameliorated Pakistan’s seemingly intractable problem of waterlogging and soil salinization. Yes, Washington’s interest may have been more related to the cold war than to helping the Pakistani people, but we’ve again reached the point where national security and benevolence align.
The Pakistanis may never come to love us. But as the current spectacle of Islamic jihadists bringing emergency aid to flooded areas warns us, we can’t afford to ignore Pakistan’s looming freshwater crisis.
Steven Solomon is the author of “Water: The Epic Struggle for Wealth, Power, and Civilization.”
Published in The New York Times
WASIM VIEW- Solomon’s article is a tough read for a Pakistan in ruin after the devastating floods. Solomon’s first few words say it all ‘hARD as it may be to believe when you see the images of the monsoon floods that are now devastating Pakistan, the country is actually on the verge of a critical shortage of fresh water.
Solomon’s article is a must read for all policymakers in Pakistan given it has the potential to make or break Pakistan. Water shortages would add to Pakistan’s unending woes and seem to be on the horizon unless Pakistan deals with this issue head-on and in supersonic speed.
Solomon warns in his article that India could use untimely dam-filling during Pakistan’s planting season to destroy Pakistani harvests. Furthermore global warming is likely to decrease river flows with Solomon warning ‘ the future looks grim. Pakistan’s population is expected to rise to 220 million over the next decade, up from around 170 million today, terrifyingly, Pakistan only has the capacity to hold a 30-day reserve storage of water as a buffer against drought’.
Solomon ends the article with credible solutions and asks for US support in helping Pakistan with the Basha Dam and other water projects. Sadly Uncle Sam has shown little interest in these areas, however Solomon’s article clearly shows America can help Pakistan, indeed that America can too, do more!
The second article is the first that focuses on David Cameron’s comments against Pakistan and is written by the former British Foreign Secretary, David Miliband.
The PM Should Listen More and Talk Less by David Miliband
David Cameron has used the past two weeks to make a verbal splash on foreign policy. Like a cuttlefish squirting out ink, his words were copious and created a mess. The cancellation by the Pakistani intelligence agency, the ISI, of a security meeting with our services shows that, in foreign policy, words can be our most powerful tool. But the Prime Minister’s have been destructive. The mindsets in Israel, Pakistan and Britain have all been given the once-over. But making a splash is not the same as making a difference. Mr Cameron either has a loose tongue – his comments about Gaza, terrorism and the Second World War were made off the cuff at press conferences or in interviews – or he is desperate for headlines. Neither is encouraging.
The Pakistan issue is the most important. It is the region’s tinderbox. We have 10,000 young men and women at risk in Afghanistan. Only a political settlement can bring an end to the war. For that we need Pakistan; and they need our economic and military support. David Cameron is right that terrorist groups have launched attacks from Pakistan, and links into parts of the Pakistani state have been an open secret over the past 20 years. Militants have moved with comparative ease across the Durand Line, and the insurgencies in the south and east of Afghanistan are directed partly from Quetta and Peshawar.
But that is only part of the picture. Pakistan has also been the victim of terror. A few days before David Cameron’s visit, a suicide bomb near Peshawar killed seven people near a gathering mourning the death of a Pakistani cabinet minister’s son. His death, too, was claimed by the Taliban. Bombs and attacks blamed by the Pakistani government on Taliban and al-Qa’ida-linked militants have killed more than 3,500 people in the past three years. Benazir Bhutto was killed by terrorism in her own country.
But the Prime Minister, in attacking Pakistan for “looking both ways”, did not tell this side of the story. In highlighting attacks originating from areas like Peshawar, he ignored the murder of people from Peshawar struggling to prevent them. And he showed no understanding of Pakistan’s path back to democratic rule in the past two years.
It would have been better for the Prime Minister to talk about ways we can support Pakistan. The level of EU funding in Pakistan is just half a euro per person compared to five to 10 times as much in other parts of the world not only more developed, but less crucial to global security.
For an Afghanistan settlement we need regional peace, and Pakistan is the key player in achieving that, along with India, Russia, Turkey and China. For that to happen it is vital that the political and military effort that Pakistan has shown is recognised. Then he would have been in a stronger position to argue for the Pakistani authorities to do more – to tackle the infrastructure of front organisations for terrorist groups in Pakistan, to complete the prosecution of those linked to the Mumbai attacks, to act with full complementarity with Afghan and Isaf forces at the Afghan border.
The Conservatives are putting domestic politics before sound foreign policy. The truth is they are continuing Labour’s policies on Turkey’s membership of the European Union, on the need to open up Gaza and on trade with India. After all, it was the British presidency of the EU in 2005 that opened membership talks.
Trade with India became a priority for the British government when Robin Cook announced a bolder policy in 1997, and between 1998 and 2008 inward investment from India into the UK increased by 3,559 per cent. That the Prime Minister wants to build on this is to be welcomed. But to laud this idea as being revolutionary, and righting a policy wrong, is just spin.
The real worry is that Mr Cameron has a shrivelled notion of Britain’s role in the world. We are not a superpower. But our open, creative economy and society are the essential counterpart to our strong role in the worlds of ideas, diplomacy, culture and security, from our handling of the economic crisis to climate change, from development to Afghanistan. We break this link at our peril.
The Prime Minister’s trade drive in India was overshadowed by a self-inflicted wound: his heralding of a cap in skilled non-EU immigration as the answer to “uncontrolled” immigration. It doesn’t add up – at home, where the cap is a minor part of the immigration numbers, or in India, where it was received with bemusement.
Equally he says he wants to export culture and British identity, but we have a government policy at home that seems to not care about British culture at all. For example, the UK Film Council is to be axed without consultation. For every pound the UK Film Council invested in British film-making, £5 was made at the box office. As an export alone it is worth £1.34bn; and as a cultural export it reflects Britain’s history and way of life.
If Britain shrinks at home, and if we make the wrong decisions for expansion in our economic and cultural identity, then there is quite literally less to export. Britain needs strong partnerships in the world. We depend on stronger international cooperation and stronger international institutions. We don’t need bluster. We all have two ears and one mouth. Foreign policy demands that we use them in that proportion.
John Rentoul is away
David Miliband is Shadow Foreign Secretary
Published in The Independent
WASIM VIEW- David Miliband’s article does well to ridicule British Prime Minister David Cameron after his crude comments against Pakistan. Miliband is cutting and correct when he said ‘David Cameron has used the past two weeks to make a verbal splash on foreign policy. Like a cuttlefish squirting out ink, his words were copious and created a mess’.
Later on in the article Miliband is right in highlighting how Cameron attacked Pakistan for “looking both ways” accusing him of not telling the other side of the story, that Pakistan is the worst victim of terror. Moreover Miliband’s article does well to bring home to the British readership the pitiful support Pakistan has received given that Pakistan is fighting a war thrusted onto it by the West.
As such Pakistan sadly acts as a mercenary force for the West with Uncle Sam paying a pittance to do its dirty work and the EU funding according to Miliband ‘just half a euro per person compared to five to 10 times as much in other parts of the world not only more developed, but less crucial to global security’. That said Miliband cannot absolve his government and his person from criticising the EU support for Pakistan or the lack of it given that Miliband and the Labour government did little to help Pakistan vis a vis increased EU funding and market access when his person and party was in office.
Miliband’s article ends as it began, with cutting words and that say it all and are condescending in nature for a new PM clearing learning on the job, Miliband ends with ‘We don’t need bluster. We all have two ears and one mouth. Foreign policy demands that we use them in that proportion’. I couldn’t agree more.
The final article is an attempt by Sayeeda Warsi to defend David Cameron’s comments against Pakistan and is necessary reading.
PM Spoke As True Friend of Pakistan by Sayeeda Warsi
A war of words has broken out between David Cameron and Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari ahead of their talks at Chequers tomorrow. The PM has enraged Pakistan’s leader by accusing the country of looking “both ways” at home-grown terrorism. Here Tory chairman Baroness Warsi, whose parents are from Pakistan, explains why the spat will not damage the countries’ long-term relationship.
There are two countries I feel I know pretty well. One is my home, Britain, where I was born and which I am privileged enough now to serve in government. The other is Pakistan, where my parents and grandparents were born and where for eight years I have run a women empowerment charity.
What seems to have been lost in the headlines this week is that Pakistan is a friend of the UK. And a friendship is meaningless unless you can be honest with each other.
David Miliband accused the Prime Minister of speaking too frankly about the terror threat Pakistan faces. But the best relationships between countries have to be rooted in honesty and mutual respect and it is absurd to deny that Pakistan has a problem with extremism and terror inside its country.
Pakistan is paying an incredibly high and tragic price for the ongoing terror threat within its borders. Thousands of Pakistanis have been victims of suicide bombs and other attacks in recent years. Many live in fear of attacks every day. Raising this issue and speaking candidly about it is the very least that a true friend can do.
And what’s more, this isn’t just about being a true friend to Pakistan. It’s also about showing respect and support to the British Pakistani community, many of whom have lost loved ones in Pakistan and are too frightened to travel there because of the threat.
Our relationship with Pakistan is also not a one-way transaction and it is not just about counter-terrorism. Pakistan is currently facing its worst floods in living memory, affecting an area of Pakistan I know well, as do the one million British Pakistanis.
In that true British tradition of helping those in need, our International Development team has offered support to 800,000 people, of whom 630,000 are women and children. We stand ready to assist the relief effort and have already given support to provide drinking water, hygiene kits and basic sanitation.
I spoke to aid workers in the region yesterday, who stressed that the need for international action is immediate and great. However, our relationship is not just about aid. That is why, in one of his first trips as Foreign Secretary, William Hague travelled to Pakistan and met not only counterparts in Islamabad, but also investors and entrepreneurs at the Karachi Stock Exchange.
It’s why Andrew Mitchell, Secretary Of State For International Development, also made an early visit, and not just to Islamabad but also to Peshawar, announcing that we had increased our level of aid to Pakistan and in particular the money we provide to drive forward educational reform.
And that is why, just a fortnight ago, I returned from a four-day trip where I talked about women’s empowerment and civil society. Long-term friends are not lost over a weekend just because honesty is brought to the table.
Under David Cameron’s leadership, this Government will have honest, robust and frank conversations with our friends. Pakistan will be no exception. Straight talking won’t break a relationship based on mutual respect which goes back more than 60 years.
Published in The Sun
WASIM VIEW- Before commenting on the article, it is important to state for the record that Sayeeda Warsi has been lavishly praised by me in the past, and was made the subject of a detailed post that can be read again here. Today the same Sayeeda Warsi is criticised by me for penning an article full of verbose and meaningless words.
In defending David Cameron’s offensive comments against Pakistan. Warsi was always playing on a sticky wicket. It seems to me that as a British Pakistani and as a Cabinet Minister she had to prove her loyalty to Britain over and above Pakistan and her Pakistani roots and she does achieve that and not much else in her article.
Warsi being a lawyer puts up a weak defence of David Cameron’s comments centring on the notion of a Pakistan-Britain friendship arguing that friends can talk frankly to each other. Warsi conveniently forgets that true friends also appreciate one another and their respective concerns and that the Pakistani-British friendship if there is one would be mindful of Pakistan’s concerns vis a vis India. The fact that Cameron uttered his foolish words in India is what riled me and Pakistanis across the world and is the proverbial Indian and African elephant in the room that Warsi and Cameron seek to ignore at their peril and hide.
If we accept the weak plea from lawyer Warsi that David Cameron’s foreign policy doctrine has a focus on being frank to friends then where was during his India visit?. Clearly the trip centred on improving trade relations a la the heralding of a new East India Cameron Company with British Cabinet ministers falling head over heels to win over their Indian friends to buy British.
Frank words on India’s occupation of Kashmir and their human rights abuses did not feature and it is this double standard that irks me and Pakistan’s Prime Minister when he said ‘”In India, you talk about terrorism but you don’t say anything about Kashmir. You forgot about the human rights abuses going on there. You should have spoken about that, too, so that we in Pakistan would have been satisfied’.
Warsi’s article is missing any mention of India or Kashmir although she boasts in her article that ‘under David Cameron’s leadership, this Government will have honest, robust and frank conversations with our friends. Pakistan will be no exception’. India will clearly be an exception to that rule as the Cameron government heralds the dawn of a new era of trade and commerce in South Asia, all hail Cameron Raj!
