Tezgam tragedy
THE Tezgam inferno near Liaquatpur in southern Punjab is a horrible reminder of the dangerous times we continue to live in, especially in a land exposed to perils that should have been eliminated long ago.
More than 70 lives have been lost in the fire that broke out early Thursday morning in the train as it journeyed upcountry from Karachi.
The railways minister added insult to injury when he blamed passengers for using a gas cylinder which caused the fire. Surely, if he was able to so quickly solve this mystery, he could have gone on to specify which passenger was responsible. Or did he mean that all of them were equally to blame? The real question is: who allowed those gas cylinders into the train?
Regrettably, accidents involving Pakistan Railways are frequent, and there have been a series of them during the year-old tenure of Minister Sheikh Rashid. A dozen of them have been categorised as ‘major’.
Incidents of fire breaking out on trains in the country are also quite common.
Railways officials reported 12 fires over one year to the National Assembly during a briefing in July. In four of them, the fire had erupted in the dining cars that accompany the passenger bogies. There were at least eight incidents of fire elsewhere on trains.
Yet it took a fatal blaze of this magnitude for Sheikh Rashid to come up with the assurance that henceforth, the ban on carrying items such as filled gas cylinders on trains would be strictly enforced.
Many of those killed were said to be going to Raiwind for the tableeghi congregation. The minister said the ban extended to tableeghi members who, by his own admission, had been given some kind of an exemption on this count. This is an admission of negligence, and bound to fuel demands for the resignation of those in charge of Pakistan Railways in aid of a fair inquiry.
If the official response offered a sense of regret it was drowned in the effort to paint a perfect picture of what the railways would look like after the government approved a proposed reform scheme. This is an ill-timed reiteration of the vows regarding a turnaround, and eclipses many issues related to the day-to-day running of the railways.
The railways minister might congratulate himself for coming up with a supposedly ingenious lottery scheme to hire new staff and go on endlessly on the need for funds to transform the system. But such thinking is at best an escape from reality, and does nothing whatsoever to address problems such as broken and crumbling tracks, improperly operated railway crossings, the lack of vigilance and security, and many other challenges plaguing the Railways.
The louder the pledges, the more obvious the contrast becomes between what is and what ought to be.
Caving in to traders
IT is a little difficult to say what exactly happened between the government and the trader community, but one thing is clear: the outcome looks very much like a capitulation on the part of the rulers. After a countrywide shutter-down strike that lasted a day and a half, a compromise was worked out that effectively postponed all decisions till January. The composition of the government delegation, which included the PTI’s Jahangir Tareen as the key negotiator, suggests this was more a political solution to the matter than one driven by the economic interests of the state. Clearly, the sight of a shutter-down strike in the middle of the Azadi march was not palatable. On the other hand, the traders had been assured that their demands for replacing the documentation measures in the new tax regime, which is being rolled out by the government after its last budget announcement, with a flat turnover tax would be presented to the IMF for approval. Evidently, this was taken by the traders as a signal that the government was willing to play ball, but that it needed permission from its overlords before making any commitment.
Now we have a very different signal altogether. Postponing everything until January, and allowing political players to enter the negotiations, has sent the signal that this is no longer just an economic issue, but also one whose political fallout is beginning to bite. Hence the entry of Mr Tareen. The trader leadership has assured the government that it will urge its constituents to step forward and pay more taxes, and in return the tax authority will create a ‘committee’, in which the traders will be represented, to hear any specific grievances. One might have considered this as some sort of ‘progress’ to break the impasse had we not seen all this before. The trader community is now notorious for offering more cooperation in the future in return for real gains in the present — gains usually defined as an exemption from whatever tax obligations the government is trying to urge them to accept. They are equally notorious for either reneging, or being otherwise unable to deliver, on these commitments by the time the deadline arrives. In the past, this has meant further talks, followed by fresh deadlines. This is how the status quo has dragged itself out for almost two decades now. So what’s a few months more?
China’s HR record
HUMAN rights should be beyond politics, as conscientious individuals must call out abuse anywhere in the world regardless of political proclivities. Unfortunately, it is the cold calculations of realpolitik that actually determine how states react to human rights situations. The recent UN debate on human rights in China, particularly in its Xinjiang region, is a prime example of how politics can shape stances on fundamental rights. Twenty-three states, mostly Western countries, slammed Beijing for its alleged human rights abuses in Xinjiang targeting the region’s native Uighur population, as well as other Muslim groups. A British statement urged China to refrain from “the arbitrary detention of Uighurs and members of other Muslim communities”. In reaction, geopolitical allies of China, including this country, shot back praising Beijing’s “remarkable achievements in the field of human rights”. Over 50 states supported China, praising it for “promoting human rights through development”. It is true that many Western states quickly pounce on geopolitical rivals, yet remain considerably muted when allies are accused of rights abuses. On the other hand, China’s allies are willing to look the other way just to benefit from the economic clout of the People’s Republic.
Beyond politics, the fact is that rights abuses anywhere must be condemned unconditionally. This country has rightly highlighted Indian atrocities in India-held Kashmir, though many Muslim states have kept quiet just to curry favour with New Delhi. Similarly, the situation in Xinjiang needs the attention of Muslim states. China is indeed an ally, therefore diplomatic channels need to be used to communicate the fact that the people of Xinjiang must be able to freely practise their faith. Perhaps delegations from Muslim states and international human rights groups should tour Xinjiang to see first-hand how the Uighurs are treated. Moreover, China itself would greatly benefit by opening up Xinjiang and letting the Uighurs and other Muslim communities take part in their religious and cultural practices freely. Terrorism is a legitimate concern, but cracking down unnecessarily on people’s way of life will only breed more alienation.