30 September 2010 By Kourosh
Ziabari The 2010 Pakistan flood was one
of the most unpleasant and painful incidents of the
year which attracted widespread international
attention due to its extensiveness and destructive
impacts. The floods started in July following heavy
monsoon rains and overflow of the Indus River in the
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Sindh, Punjab and Balochistan
regions of Pakistan. It is estimated that more than
two thousand people lost their lives and over a
million homes were destroyed since the flooding began.
According to the United Nations estimates, over 21
million people have been injured or displaced as a
result of the devastative flood. Pakistani journalist and former
Air Force employee Shahid R. Siddiqi joined me in an
interview to discuss the aftermaths of the
unprecedented flood which encompassed the whole
Pakistan in a matter of days and caused serious
damages to the country's agriculture, industry, energy
sector, infrastructures and even politics. Mr. Siddiqi
answered my questions about the government's
management of the flood and the distribution of
humanitarian aid sent by different countries to the
flood-hit regions. He explained that how the
unanticipated disaster paralyzed Pakistan in an
astonishing way and surprised the unprepared
government which failed to manage the crisis
appropriately. In this interview, I also seized the
opportunity to ask Mr. Siddiqi some questions about
the prospect of Iran – Pakistan relations and
Pakistan's stance on Iran's nuclear program. Shahid R. Siddiqi has been a
broadcaster with the Radio Pakistan and the Islamabad
bureau chief of the "Pakistan and Gulf Economist". His
articles and political commentaries appear in the
Pakistani newspapers such as Dawan, The Nation and
Pakistan Herald. He is also the founder of Asian
American Republican Club. Siddiqi is a frequent
contributor to Foreign Policy Journal, Middle East
Times and Axis of Logic. Kourosh Ziabari: How did the
government of Pakistan manage the aftermaths of the
recent devastative flood? Has it succeeded in
preventing a humanitarian disaster from taking place
in the flood-hit regions? Shahid R. Siddiqi: The floods
caught the Government of Pakistan totally unawares.
Unfortunately, civilian governments in Pakistan have
historically failed to comprehend the importance of
preparedness for disaster and relief management. This
is exactly what happened with the present government.
This happened in spite the fact that an organization,
Disaster Management Cell, was in place with very
adequate experience of handling the massive earthquake
that hit the Northern Areas of Pakistan in 2005. This
lack of preparedness was a direct consequence of
general mismanagement at the top levels of the
government. These were the most widespread
and disastrous floods, the like of which had never
before been witnessed in this region. The scale of
destruction did not dawn upon the government until
much later, until after the waters had inundated
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and hit Punjab. And by the time the
government began to respond, millions had been
uprooted and tremendous losses had occurred. According
to one estimate these floods have caused a disaster
bigger than Haiti and Tsunami combined. The losses were colossal. Twenty
million people were affected. 20% of the country,
mostly the farmland, went under water. Millions of
cattle heads died, standing crops of rice, cereals and
vegetables were destroyed, enormous quantities of
stored wheat grain was lost to flood waters and the
agricultural infrastructure crumbled. Breakdown in
transportation caused food shortages all over the
country resulting in prohibitively high prices. The humanitarian disaster was
humongous and beyond the capacity of the civil
administration to handle. The military did a
commendable job of rescue and relief. It quietly moved
in to fill the void due to the absence of the civil
administration and worked tirelessly round the clock
with heads down. Had it not been for it, the
humanitarian disaster would have been much greater. The flood waters originated in
the mountainous catchment areas in the north and
flowed south overflowing the banks of several smaller
rivers to eventually join the River Indus, overflowing
it and causing all adjoining areas to come under
water. The flood has now subsided in the north – in
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Punjab, and the water is now
passing through the southern province of Sindh to
drain into the Arabian Sea. Hopefully by the middle of
October the waters would recede in the South too. As life in the north returns to
normal and people return to their devastated towns,
villages and homes, the more difficult and capital
intensive phase of rehabilitation begins. The
government is short of funds. Aid is coming in but is
not enough. The UN is trying to raise funds for
rehabilitation but the response is slow. The economic
situation in the country is bad. People struggle to
keep their body and soul together and raise a shelter
over their heads to resume their lives. KZ: Many countries have
dispatched convoys of humanitarian aid containing
foodstuff, medicine, clothing and other basic
necessities to be distributed among the flood-hit
families. Has the process of distribution been
satisfactory? SS: The distribution of relief
goods was undertaken mainly by the military and the
NGOs. The civil administration joined in later.
Although the distribution was handled quite
efficiently, the aid supplies were found inadequate at
times. The very scale of disaster, very large areas
involved, difficulties of transportation and
distribution issues due to inaccessibility of marooned
populations, complicated the relief work. There was
acute shortage of helicopters, which were eventually
diverted by the Americans from Afghanistan and which
came very handy in search, rescue and supply
droppings. KZ: Which countries provided the
most help to Pakistan? Has the extent of international
aid been sufficiently helpful to the families grappled
with the flood? SS: The largest chunk of aid in
dollar terms came form the U.S. The UN has also
launched a big effort at raising funds to help out in
the rehabilitation phase but the response of the
international community is slow. It is gratifying to
see that India also contributed to the UN fund. The
European Union has also made a sizable donation. Given the scale of destruction,
it is beyond the capacity of Pakistan to help
rehabilitate the affected people in their homes and
enable them to make a new beginning. International
assistance is critically important. KZ: So far, Iran has dispatched
13 convoys of humanitarian aid to Pakistan. How do you
estimate Iran's assistance to Pakistan? What's the
general viewpoint of the people with regards to Iran's
helps? SS: Iranian aid convoys were much
appreciated at the government level as well as by the
people. They came very handy in meeting the needs of
the affectees. The consignment was handed over to the
military for distribution. Pakistanis have great deal of
emotional attachment with the Iranian people and they
also hold the Ummah in very high regard. From the days
of former King Reza Shah, although not for the love of
the Shah himself, Pakistan had very close bilateral
relations both at the government and the people’s
level. Even a small gesture from Iran, whether by the
government or the people, is therefore much
appreciated. A point to note is the close
historical ties that existed between Iran and the
India much before the British colonized India.
Substantial migration took place from Iran into India
and even today such old migratees keep their ancestral
identities alive by using surnames such as Mashhadi,
Isfahani, Tabrezi, etc. Persian remained the official
language in India at one time and every Urdu poet or
scholar worth his name thought his work to be
incomplete unless he had a book or two in Persian
language to his credit. There was a tremendous
influence of Persian culture in the Moghul court. This
brought Pakistanis very close to the Iranians. KZ: What's your prediction for
the prospect of Iran - Pakistan relations? How can
these two neighboring countries contribute to the
empowerment of Islamic solidarity? How can the
bilateral relations between Iran and Pakistan serve
the interests of the regional countries? SS: Neither Pakistan nor Iran can
change the geography of the region. Both of these
people have been neighbors always and will always be,
till the end of times. Over centuries they have been
influenced by each other's culture, language and life
style. They share the same religion and about 15%
population of Pakistan is of Shia denomination, which
is the official religion of Iran and which therefore
looks up to Iranian Shia leadership for guidance. This
explains the cultural, social and religious affinity
between the two people. On the political front, the two
countries have enjoyed very close relations in the
past. They were part of the SEATO and CENTO, the two
U.S. sponsored military pacts, along with Iraq and
Turkey back in the 1960s. The Shah was very supportive
of Pakistan and when in 1965 war broke out between
Pakistan and India, he opened his armory gates to
Pakistan. Pakistan was able to purchase some tanks and
F-86 aircraft from Iran during that period when it
could not get these from other sources. Unfortunately, relations between
President General Zia and the Khomeini regime became
sour. The Iranian revolutionary leadership went to the
extent of refusing to receive President Zia at the
head of a Muslim delegation that wanted to help
negotiate a ceasefire and reconciliation between Iran
and Iraq when they were at war. Although the official
relations have gradually improved ever since, they
could not be restored to the same level of cordiality
as during the Shah and a certain distance remains. I
think this is not in the interest of any of the two
countries. One reason for this lack of
warmth on the part of Iran towards Pakistan is
Pakistan's vey close relations with Saudi Arabia,
which is obviously not to the liking of the Iranian
regime. Then Pakistan has been closely allied to the
U.S. on account of political, economic and strategic
compulsions of its various regimes. Another factor
that contributed to this state of relations is
Pakistan's support to the Sunni Mujahedeen groups
during their war against Soviet Union and later to the
Saudi backed Taliban, the followers of Salafi sect. But all said and done, it is in
the interest of the two neighbors to forge a very
close alliance by showing an understanding and
tolerance for each other's national interests and
policies. In practical terms it not possible for
either country to make an about turn and reconcile and
realign its policies with the other. In an environment
where the West is forging its own alliances with a
view to strategically dominate this region and control
and harness energy resources of the Caspian Sea Basin
and Central Asia, it is imperative for Iran and
Pakistan, and other Islamic countries of the Middle
East, to see through the game plan, shun their
differences, show tolerance and forge a broader
alliance in their own good. At a time when the world is
moving towards regional unions and trading blocs, why
should Muslim governments of the region display a
myopic approach towards safeguarding and promoting
long term Muslim interests and fritter away their
energies and resources in squabbling with each other
and trying to pull each other down. For the moment this seems to be a
tall order. This cannot be done unless the Shia-Sunni
divide among Muslim states of the region is not
bridged, unless the rulers give up their petty
differences, overcome their suspicions of each other,
stop playing in the hands of big powers and show
statesmanship. But, unfortunately, this element is
entirely missing from the present crop of Muslim
rulers of this region. In the present scenario the
Islamic countries of the Middle East and South West
Asia are drifting apart along the Shia-Sunni divide.
The Sunni Arab States do not want to see a nuclear
armed Shia Iran, particularly after the fall of the
Sunni government in Iraq, which could potentially lead
to the creation of a pro-Iran Shia regime in Iraq
right in their midst, which they fear will create a
strong and aggressive bloc that could destabilize
them. This fear among Arab states will not serve the
interests of Iran at all. The Arabs are bound to join
hands with Iran's enemies to weaken it. That explains
the news report that Saudi Arabia agreed to allow
Israel to use its air space to attack Iran's nuclear
facilities. This acrimony between Iran and
Arab states places Pakistan in a difficult situation.
Pakistan does not want to see Iran attacked or be
engulfed in war. It cannot also afford to give up its
relations with Arab states due to the economic and
political support it gets from them, which Iran will
not provide. But Pakistan is in a unique
position to play an important role in bridging the
gulf between Iran and the Arab world. It can help
reconcile differences and allay each others' fears.
Before this can happen, Pak-Iran relations will have
to be brought on solid footing and Iran will need to
soften its rhetoric and aggressive posture to create
an environment of reassurance in the Arab world. KZ: Over the past years, Iran has
been constantly exposed to the threat of a military
strike on its nuclear facilities by the United States
and Israel. What's the stance of Pakistani people and
government in this regard? SS: The Western threat of
military strike against Iran has been a matter of
great concern for an average Pakistani. He believes
that not only would this cause death and destruction
in a neighboring Islamic country, but it would engulf
the whole region in a cycle of violence. There is also
a likelihood of serious environmental disaster due to
release of radioactive materials over the skies of
Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Pakistanis believe that Iran has
the right to pursue development of nuclear energy for
legitimate and peaceful purposes and that any doubt or
dispute in the matter should be resolved through
dialogue rather than arm twisting. The general impression in
Pakistan is that the aggressive American posture
towards Iran arises out of Israeli pressure that has
been brought upon the US and European allies. Israel
has always been paranoid with those Muslim states that
either have developed or are developing military
capability to challenge Israel's might and domination,
even if it is in conventional terms. It attacked and
destroyed the Iraqi reactor as a preemptive action. In
subsequent years it planned similar attacks against
Pakistan's nuclear facilities in collusion with India,
which were thwarted by Pakistan's military. And now it
targets Iran because of Iran's ability to defeat
Israeli aggression in the region directly and
indirectly, e.g. through Shia groups in Lebanon. The Pakistan government clearly
favors dialogue and not armed confrontation as means
of resolving this dispute. KZ: United States and its allies
around the world have imposed several rounds of
unilateral sanctions against Iran over its nuclear
program. What's your idea about this? While Israel
possesses up to 200 nuclear warheads, it's Iran which
is under international pressure to halt its nuclear
program. What do you think about the international
pressures imposed on Iran over its nuclear program? SS: Pakistanis know very well
that the U.S. does not act evenhandedly when it comes
to favoring Israel. The world knows about Israel's
undeclared nuclear arsenal. But neither the U.S. and
nor Europe are willing to acknowledge this fact.
Israel happens to be a major nuclear threat to its
neighbors, yet the U.S. behaves as if neither Israel
has any nuclear weapons nor does the U.S. know
anything about them. When it suits the US it does not
shy away from practicing double standards. The U.S. did not act the same way
with Pakistan. Pakistan was subjected to all kinds of
sanctions after it exploded its bomb in response to
the Indian explosion. It was only when the U.S.
desperately needed Pakistan's support to fight the
Taliban after 9/11 that the sanctions simply
evaporated overnight. I believe, and so do the
Pakistanis generally, that the U.S. has shown indecent
haste in imposing sanctions against Iran. Quite
clearly diplomacy has not been given a chance. China
did resist the U.S. pressure but Russia readily
capitulated and voted with the U.S., which came as a
surprise. Russia was supplying nuclear reactor to Iran
and as an emerging power it was expected to show some
spine. The others have been forced to fall in line. With the U.S. having donned the
mantle of the sole super power, it is in a position to
twist the tail of most countries which either fall in
its sphere of influence or need its support in one
form or the other. It utilizes this advantage to the
hilt and forces its will down everyone's throat.
Turkey and Mexico played a positive role and America
should have given their effort a chance. However, the U.S. involvement in
Afghan imbroglio and the economic melt down it faces
at home makes it difficult for it to open a new front
against Iran as of now. It has been holding Israel
back for this reason. But once US withdrawal from
Afghanistan begins and the economy shows signs of
improvement, the threat could revive. It goes to the credit of Iran to
have withstood these sanctions and is resisting the
American, European and Israeli pressure with
determination. - Kourosh Ziabari is an Iranian
freelance journalist and media correspondent. He has
interviewed political commentator and linguist Noam
Chomsky, member of New Zealand parliament Keith Locke,
Australian politician Ian Cohen, member of German
Parliament Ruprecht Polenz, former Mexican President
Vicente Fox, former U.S. National Security Council
advisor Peter D. Feaver, Nobel Prize laureate in
Physics Wolfgang Ketterle, Nobel Prize laureate in
Chemistry Kurt Wüthrich, Nobel Prize laureate in
biology Robin Warren, famous German political prisoner
Ernst Zündel, Brazilian cartoonist Carlos Latuff,
American author Stephen Kinzer, syndicated journalist
Eric Margolis, former assistant of the U.S. Department
of the Treasury Paul Craig Roberts,
American-Palestinian journalist Ramzy Baroud and the
former President of the American Motion Picture Arts
and Sciences Sid Ganis. Comments 💬 التعليقات |