Code of conduct as a point of departure

By BIPIN ADHIKARI

Mahatma Gandhi once said that there are two kinds of peace. The first kind of peace silences the guns and the second makes them irrelevant. The code of conduct jointly declared on 13 May 2003 by His Majesty’s Government and the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) for the mutually agreed period of cease-fire is indeed a point of departure to achieve a peace which, if pursued with honesty and a high degree of transparency, may not only silence the guns, but may also make them irrelevant.

Nineteen of the 22 rules of the code of conduct, including the preamble are substantially based on the draft of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), which was submitted to both parties requesting them to formalize a cease fire agreement inclusive of a detailed code of conduct. Both the parties to the conflict, thus, must be appreciated for their response to the call of the civil society including the only statutory human rights body of Nepal. The challenge now is to go beyond, and how the parties deal with the remaining outstanding issues.

Indeed, there are many formidable issues before us. It is necessary to enumerate the provisions that the parties to the conflict categorically ignored from the rules of NHRC proposed draft.

First and foremost, they ignored the suggestion of the NHRC to abrogate the Terrorist and Destructive Activities Act (TADA) of 2058, which has virtually rendered defunct the rule of law and the normal course of justice in the country. Secondly, the Code also does not mention the need of continued border patrolling by the Royal Nepal Army to prevent infiltration of militants, weapons and explosives as a legitimate task of the state force. To think of a proper management of conflict in Nepal while ignoring altogether the India-neglected / inspired activities around the international border is indeed a matter of great pity. Thirdly, the code should also have included commitments towards the reduction of defense expenditures and further recruitment of state forces, as well as acquisition of additional military equipment’s except those that had already been ordered. A similar provision was necessary for the Maoists as well.

Similarly, the March 13 Code of Conduct also does not require the publication of the names (real or pseudo), home address or other details of the people who have been killed during the conflict. It does not respond to the obligation to give information to the family members about the place of death and whereabouts of their remains. A provision for unhindered access to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and/or other international humanitarian relief organizations for the purpose of arranging the release of people being detained unlawfully as a result of the conflict, as well as the recovery of the dead and the attainment of the wounded is also missing from the Code of Conduct.

Indeed, there is nothing in the Code of Conduct requiring Maoists to immediately halt all recruitment and training of additional militia, and there is also no mention of declaring the actual number of their militia. The Maoists should also have been asked to ensure that their sister organizations and sympathizers within the country and overseas, would not engage in any violent or disruptive activity for assisting meaningful and peaceful dialogue between the parties.

Above all, an important issue is missing in the Code of Conduct, that is, the cooperation between the parties and the NHRC in the latter’s task of monitoring and investigating human rights violations that have taken place in the past and/or the human rights violations that might take place during the cease fire period. Moreover, in the event that negotiations are stalled, the NHRC draft required that the parties agree to continue respecting and abiding by the code of conduct stipulated in the agreement and continue to seek innovative ways and means of resolving the impasse. This provision is also conspicuously absent from the formalized Code of Conduct of the government and the Maoists.

These comments, however, do not mean that the newly released Code of Conduct is insignificant. What has been achieved will give strong foundation for further peace initiatives in the future. Even at its present strength, notwithstanding various criticisms when compared with NHRC draft, the Code seeks to implement various confidence-building measures, and provides many interim benefits to the parties concerned as well as the general public. A process for a smooth transition to the negotiations stage of the peace process has begun. Any ongoing negotiation has to be scrutinized and assessed in relation to these two important achievements.

Rule 18 of the present Code of Conduct speaks about forming a monitoring team by mutual agreement. It remains to be seen how and what will be the make up of such a team. In any case, there must be a provision for human rights monitoring. Issues of human rights are paramount vis-a-vis the conflict not only in terms of transitional justice but to counter the hold of authoritarian ideologies in social and political institutions at large, which can be detrimental to the process unless they are checked. Some might focus on the ultimate objective of a peaceful settlement with the belief that the process would lead to a settlement ignoring violations committed in the past. But the demand that the peace process take into account human rights concerns has become increasingly strong around the world.

The major issue about the peace process is however intact. One needs political competence to negotiate peace and the illegitimate Chand government is devoid of this competence. It cannot speak on behalf of the people. Peace is not possible when the parliamentary political forces, which are legitimate stakeholders of the democratic political system that Nepal had till October 4, 2003, (and which still represent the nation politically) continue to question the legitimacy of the government created after the forceful seizure of power. The fact remains that even if these political parties have serious deficiencies in their attitudes and working style, the utility and representative character of these political forces is paramount in the system that the democratic Constitution of 1990 created.

Violence is what we get when conflicts are neglected, mismanaged, or handled destructively. Peacemakers should not, therefore, try to corner the conflict that exists between the king and major political parties while attempting to bring peace. Instead, they should help the system back on the legitimate track. Therefore, the existing political impasse must also be addressed as part of a larger and durable peace process. As such, the whole nation should take the newly released Code of Conduct as only the point of departure for today.

(The author is a lawyer)

Oops! splash from Holikas

By NIMESH HENRY BASNET

The festival of Holi is said to hold a great significance in Hindu society and is celebrated with much gaiety and merriment to the rhythm of colours and brotherly aspiration to mark the age old tradition. Legend has it that when Holika (sister of Hiranyakashyap) tried to inflict harm on the innocent and benevolent boy Bhakta Parhlad, she was burnt to death by the power of the omnipresent All Mighty.

Holi is celebrated to commemorate the victory of Good over Evil. But hold on, here we seem to have forgotten that it is only in one particular day—Holi Day—it is allowed to splash water and colours on those who are willing to participate in the festival.

Two to three years back, Holy used to start a week before, and schools and colleges had to be closed mostly due to the fear of getting hit by dirty-water-filled balloons. Youngsters were thrilled at the idea of getting a week long holiday.

I still remember being bombarded with water-filled balloons last year. And guess who was the attacker? It was none other than a Holika atop a roof, but there was no omnipresent All Mighty to save this Bhakta Parhlad of the twenty-first century. After hitting the right target, Holika gave a cynical smile. At one point, I thought of going inside and complaining to her parents, but somehow her sweet sixteen charm and Tom-boyish aura prevented me from doing so. Didn’t we (males) too rejoiced in the water spree?

This year I thought I would be lucky. Not perceiving any threat, me and my cousin brother decided to go for an evening stroll on last Sunday, the eve of Holi. We were cautious, though. As we were walking on the pavement, opposite the UN building in Pulchowk, lo! two gorgeous Holikas came alongside on a scooter, and threw balloons at us. One of them flashed a smile, too. May be, as sort of compensation for the misdeed! Surprisingly, I was not annoyed. Hey, thumps-up! Feminists need not lament gender discrimination any more. Wasn’t that one step towards Gender Equality?

Iraq : Shadow over India and Pakistan

By M R JOSSE

By the time this is published, the US-led war against Iraq may have already begun. Or, by some miracle, it may have been averted. But, whatever happens, it will be interesting to review how the crisis over Iraq has, thus far, played out in policy terms in New Delhi and Islamabad.

SHIFT FROM ‘MIDDLE PATH’

Indian Foreign Minister Yashwant Sinha’s public comments on March 10 may usefully be recalled. According to agency reports, he asserted that India would follow the ‘middle path’ on Iraq while refusing to make any commitment on whether it would allow US troops to use Indian facilities should war break out.

Sinha disclosed that "there was a consensus that military conflict should be avoided" and added that "there should be a peaceful solution and the United Nations should be protected." Asked if India would allow the US to use its facilities in the event of war, Sinha said that no such request had been made.

Two days later, however, pressed by the political Opposition, Vajpayee told parliament that if unilateralism prevails the UN would be deeply scarred with disastrous consequences for the world order. "The government of India would strongly urge that no military action be taken which does not have the collective concurrence of the international community."

Vajpayee also emphasised that "governments should be changed and made with the people’s mandate. No external power should change a regime and form a regime with its support. This is wrong and it cannot be supported." Lawmakers then asked him why India did not condemn the US for its threat of war. In response, he replied: "When there is action, we will condemn it."

The Times of India, reporting the same event revealed that the observations made in both houses of parliament were not contained in any formal or identical statements. Rather they were responses to the demands of MPs that he explain the government’s position on regime change and unilateral action with respect to Iraq. Even more revealing perhaps is that "neither the statement nor his comments named the US."

INDIA’S INTEREST

Clearly, South Block shifted its stand from a "middle path" leaning towards those opposed to war. Significantly, though, it was not unduly harsh. Although New Delhi’s position is not, perhaps, as uncomfortable as that of Islamabad, the choice before India, too, is not a simple or easy one.

That was well brought out in an opinion piece by K Subrahmanyam (TOI, March 5, 2003) revealingly entitled Say No to War, But Don’t Ignore National Interest. Among the points he made were the following:

"We in India should learn to distinguish between our preferences for the ethical and politically desirable policy of avoiding war on the one hand and being ready to accept the consequences of a war if it happens and safeguarding our national interests. While our public pronouncements should reflect the former stand, our policy should be based on an objective assessment of the latter."

Subrahmanyam’s stress on the real-politik aspects of the Iraq crisis finds resonance in American Ambassador to India Robert D Blackwell’s interesting offer of "a piece of the Iraq pie" – as TOI put it – in an interview to that newspaper (March 12).

In response to a query whether there was a role for India in post-war Iraq, Blackwell has this to say: "If Saddam is disarmed by force there will be a regime change in Iraq, which will require a great deal of reconstruction. At that point, India will have two fundamental roles. One is of course the physical rebuilding of Iraq. The other, which is less remarked on, is the task of constructing a civil society in Iraq."

An unstated, but vital, corollary is that an India that has a good working relationship with the US would be well positioned to take care of the interest of her over 3.5 million workers in the Gulf region bordering Iraq, in a post-Saddam era. In addition, it should also help ensure that there is no disruption of oil supplies from the region, estimated to constitute 60 percent of India’s total crude oil imports.

MUCH MORE DIFFICULT

Pakistan’s position is, of course, much more tenuous than that of India’s. For one thing, as a current member of the UN Security Council, Pakistan is under intensely close scrutiny by the world community. For another, she faces this awful dilemma: whether to side with Iraq, a fellow-Muslim state, or with America with whom she has joined in a war against international terrorism, since 9/11. The latter is a strategic choice made by Pakistan that has greatly helped neutralise America’s growing ties with arch rival, India.

Incidentally, a sense of Islamabad’s difficulty can be gleaned from the fact that when US General Tommy Franks, recently named commander who will oversee a possible war on Iraq, met with Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf at January end, Prime Minister Zafarullah Jamali was visiting the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and Oman discussing ways of averting war.

That is why, no doubt, Jamali’s March 12 televised address to his nation kept observers guessing as to what Pakistan would do with respect to the "second SC resolution" if, that is, it is actually voted upon. Jamali stopped short of declaring that it would vote against war, for war, or abstain. Subsequently, he went on record to deny US pressure to back a UN resolution authorising war against Iraq.

Many in Pakistan fear that there could be adverse repercussions from the US which last month sent Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia, Christina Rocca, to Islamabad to lobby for support. That aside, American President George W Bush has twice called Musharraf in February to discuss Iraq.

Since Islamabad cast its strategic lot with America, after 9/11, it has won a host of economic and military concessions from Washington. For instance, the US has rescheduled three billion dollars worth of Pakistani debt, promised to cancel a one-billion dollar debt, lifted military sanctions on military training and sales, revived suspended aid programmes, and awarded trade privileges to Pakistani textile exporters.

Pakistan has also won around 1.1 billion dollars worth in aid measures from Washington and 900 million dollars in compensation for use of its facilities from the US, Britain, Japan, Saudi Arabia and the EU. On March 15, Bush waived sanctions imposed after Musharraf’s seizure of power in 1999 and announced that he would welcome Jamali to the While House on March 28 – at which time the US could be embroiled in war with Iraq.

With public protests against a war in Iraq mounting, Pakistan is thus positioned between the devil and the deep blue sea. Conceivably, a meaningful post-Saddam role in Iraq, plus a quick and decisive US victory with minimal collateral damage could help ease Pakistan’s pain. So, also, would if "the second SC resolution" were not to be voted upon.

While the future will determine how things eventually pan out, in the meantime, there is much to learn about the art of statecraft and the practice of international relations from the policy shifts, public utterances, even eloquent silences, discernible or audible in New Delhi and Islamabad in the Iraqi context.

Time to take stock

SUMAN MALLA

About two years ago, amid dispute over the control of All Nepal Football Association (ANFA), a financial irregularity was one of the charges laid against the Ganesh Thapa-led association affiliated to the football’s world governing body FIFA.

The charge was dropped after the committee, formed by the National Sports Council (NSC) to investigate the matter, reported no proof to substantiate such allegations laid against the association. The committee indeed reported about association’s poor maintenance of bookkeeping resembling more like that of a private firm.

It may not have looked that serious for most of us here, but not everyone is as easy to assert. FIFA, on March 12, urged national football associations of Nepal, Vietnam and Chile to clarify the use of funds provided under its ambitious ‘Goal Project’ until April. FIFA paid each country one million dollars over a four-year period from 1999-2002.

On the same day, FIFA cut off all aid to Somalia, Burundi and Puerto Rico after they failed to provide with proper record of how the money had been spent.

Nepal was one of the first countries in the region to be recommended for the project in 1999 following the inspection visit here by FIFA programme coordinator Jurg Nepfer earlier that year. However, the project did not go ahead in time in Nepal due to ANFA dispute.

Much to the relief of football enthusiasts though, FIFA, in November 2001, had released the suspension of the Goal Project to Nepal and allocated US$ 450,647 in first instalment of the project funding.

Out of its total 204 member countries, FIFA selected 110 for the Goal Project at its Congress held in Los Angeles in 1999. Four of the SAARC-member countries – Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Nepal and the Maldives, were named for the project.

The Goal Project, a financial assistance program of FIFA, first conceived and articulated by its president Sepp Blatter in 1998, carries more than US$ 40 million to empower national football associations with offices, pitches and provide them with supporting facilities like training and tuition.

Well, works taking place at all three districts selected for the project — Lalitpur, Rupandehi and Dharan — suggest that the FIFA fund has been used for the very purpose with good intention.

Subsequent to the recent developments — from the unification of two football ruling bodies to launching of broadly-based youth programme to resumption of international competitions — have raised hopes among footballers and its loyal supporters for better football future.

The officials at ANFA, who often bargain for lion’s share of media coverage, shy away whenever they face with these situations. They claim FIFA’s notice was nothing more than a simple inquiry. If that was true, we would not have the news at the first place as there are more than 100 countries benefiting from FIFA’s programme.

Now, instead of fretting about negative media coverage they should be more careful to respect the support they have received from the football’s world governing body. With limited or no assistance coming from the government, such supports from international agencies are imperative for the development of the sport.

Failure, on part of ANFA, to take FIFA’s call seriously could spell disaster to the development of country’s football. That would lead to further slide in country’s football, inviting more frustration and disappointment for thousands of football followers.

That would be a betrayal to those district authorities who have kept so much faith on ANFA. Lalitpur sub-metropolis provided some 70 ropanis of land on 50-year lease while Dharan agreed to fund two million rupees on top of the land required for the purpose.

Depending upon the success of the first project, FIFA would provide further million dollars to those countries for the next four-year period 2003-2006. And ANFA, without doubt, should be counting on this fund for its ambitious plan to launch youth football academies in 30 districts, catering to the needs of some 1,000 talented young footballers.

But fantasising on big projects may alone, however far-fetched it is, shows no relevance to reality until those at the helm adopt a homogeneous approach and sincere application. The establishment of various committees under the leadership of individuals from within ANFA body and outside indicates some sort of decentralisation of authority. We need to make up the lost time and follow other countries in the region in formulating attractive programmes to raise the level of the game.

At this time all that country’s football lovers could hope is those at the helm would bear this in mind, and approach the job with diligence.

Greasy monopoly

BEENA KHAREL

Privatisation of public enterprises (PEs) is a tricky business, especially when it involves more politics and less economics. Although discourse on privatisation attempt to focus on the logic of economics, they turn out to be painfully political in practice in our country. The outward manifestation of direct political interference is the appointment of the "blessed guys" to the top slots of PEs, who lack the competence, commitment and confidence the job demands.

The government’s avid interest in privatisation is well documented in the Privatisation Act. But that interest is yet to find a meaningful outlet. Definitely not in the underselling of assets or hazy deals struck with private parties. Thus far, more than one dozen PEs have been privatised.

The pace of privatisation has been virtually stalled since mid-nineties. The longstanding dispute over the Butwal Power Company was finally settled recently. But the privatisation story of the Nepal Tea Development Corporation is still mired in controversy. In yet another embarrassing episode, the public-enterprise-turned-private-enterprise Nepal Agriculture Tools Factory was handed back to the state. Such change of hands displayed the government’s lack of foresight and aptitude for running a privatisation business it embarked on immediately after the restoration of multi-party democracy, as if the privatisation mantra was a passport to quick economic prosperity.

A number of PEs were handed over to the private sector in a haphazard manner, without studying relevant details, making thorough research and holding constructive discussions that would have enriched privatisation, which follows the logic of efficient allocation and utilisation of scare resources.

Privatisation of high-cost and risk-prone state-run corporations such as the Nepal Oil Corporation (NOC), the Nepal Water Supply Corporation and other public utilities is like opening the Pandora’s Box. Any takers? The first hitch is in finding the clients who are ready to procure an enterprise with its bloated bureaucracy and other imaginable ills. Surely, privatisation does not rest on the bedrock of charity. Even in case where private entrepreneurs came for the shopping, the government authorities scared them away by creating more obstacles and uncalled-for hazards.

So what even if the old giants keep on guzzling the state coffers, the authorities would not sell them off unless eligible parties come with tempting proposals, something that is worth waiting for. One fine day when a "lucrative" proposal hits the desk, a state enterprise in question is silently packed off, without making any fuss over the procedures. Were the whole process transparent enough, the public would not have become disenchanted with the government-run privatisation programme. Nor would have there been any scope for unscrupulous activity.

Greasy area

Lack of transparency, in varying degrees though, is a trademark of the state-owned enterprises. Nowhere is it more evident than in the state-owned NOC. Details of how the Corporation conducts business and its arrangement with the Indian Oil Corporation (IOC), among others, are hard to ferret out. The state-owned monopoly is dependent on IOC for refining and initial storage of crude petro-products imported from abroad. A report submitted early this year by a committee lashed out at its lack of transparency and financial irregularities.

Supposedly in dire straits, the Corporation is being criticised for not opening its account book for intellectual scrutiny. It had asked the government for one billion rupees to "settle accounts" with IOC. The financial settlement is expected within this month as the Indian fiscal year ends on March 31. According to a news report, NOC has to pay over two billion rupees to clear import accounts, including outstanding dues.

The Corporation is running from pillar to post, begging for funds to finance the imports of February. Since the government flatly refused to extend monetary assistance, NOC is turning to Japan for short-term loans that will be channelled through the Debt Relief Fund. Its profit vaults are said to be empty, and officials are blaming the cross subsidy mechanism. But the disparity between import price and sales price is too big a figure to be ignored. On average, the import of petroleum products stands at Rs 1.70 billion in one month, while the revenue from their sale hardly exceeds one billion rupees.

NOC accounts have remained unaudited for several years. It is estimated to be losing Rs 660 million every month. Surprisingly though, the loss-bearing corporation is doling out bonus ("damn insufficient") to its employees. This has led independent experts to recommend specified profits for NOC, say, 12 per cent of its net assets.

Comfortably couched in protectionism, NOC enjoys monopoly on the import and storage of diesel, petrol, kerosene and Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG). It has no definite pricing mechanism as such, and the cabinet fixes the price of the petro-products, something explicitly discouraged by the report. For, the political meddling with prices is simply unhealthy. Instead it advocated independent pricing system undertaken by an "independent body" that is understandably non-political.

Domestic price adjustment is done after a long gap. This kind of delay is proving to be costly. When the price in the international market decreases, it is not reflected in the domestic market. But even a slight increase in price abroad shoots up the domestic price. It took almost two years to revise the prices of the petroleum products. Last year, the prices of petrol and LPG were raised, keeping those of diesel and kerosene untouched.

Subsidy on kerosene is found to be helping the rich more than the poor. In view of the negative effect of cross subsidy, the report underlined the need for dual pricing of kerosene. There’s also a pressing need to adopt "bordering prices" of petroleum to check cross-border smuggling.

It is high time the government, bugged by the calls for NOC’s "gradual" privatisation, looked beyond IOC. The possibility of making arrangements, needless to say transparent, with parties other than IOC needs to be explored. NOC has been paying IOC a large chunk of money for processing crude oil bought from the international market.

While some emergency relief package may be provided to NOC to help it bail out of the import payment crisis, it won’t permanently fix the levers that are clearly out of control. Tough measures are to be taken for tough reasons. This holds true for other ailing state-run enterprises, too.

An American in Baghdad

MICAH KELLER SHRISITI

The feeling I got in Baghdad this January was the same feeling I felt in Washington DC right after September 11. A feeling that something awful has happened and that something worse might happen at any moment. I spent a month in Iraq with the Iraq Peace Team working to develop peaceful relationships with normal Iraqi civilians.

At Baghdad University, I sat in on a graduate-level English class. After I introduced myself as an American the discussion quickly turned from literature to politics and the prospect of war.

"How can Bush say he is helping the Iraqi people, liberating them?" a female student began. "When he bombs our water facilities he is bombing us, when the electricity is bombed he bombs us. Those bridges—we use those bridges to go to work. He is bombing us."

"Where are you from?"

This was one of the most common questions asked of me during my Christmas visit to Iraq. I always answered with hesitation, "I’m American," scared of what the Iraqi people might think of a young American man in their midst. I was surprised to find that everyone who asked me this question extended his or her friendship and often said something like "American people good, American government bad."

In fact, I made a lot of Iraqi friends in Baghdad. I stayed in a downtown hotel for a whole month, so most of my friends are waiters, shopkeepers and hotel clerks. I’m incredibly worried for the safety of these friends during the US invasion and during the civil unrest that is sure to follow.

I remember the strong arms and kind words of Deah, a waiter in one of Baghdad’s many excellent cafes. Deah speaks really good English and spends a lot of time in the gym lifting weights. It’s really hard to imagine him cowering in a room with no electricity and bombs falling all around.

I remember Hassim’s eyes more than anything; the bright hopeful eyes of a 10 year old. Hassim is a shoeshine boy on the streets of Baghdad. As I said goodbye to Hassim in January my own eyes filled with tears—the future seemed so uncertain for this young kid.

Hassim has every reason to be angry at the world. At his young age he plies the sidewalks outside Baghdad’s hotels and cafes from dawn till late at night, hoping for a shoeshine customer. Dealing all day with rude customers, he fumes from leaded-gasoline and Baghdad’s unruly traffic. Hassim also remembers the US missles falling on his home city in 1998. Although only 5 years old at the time, he like most Baghdad residents, is still terrorised by the memory of huddling in the dark with the sound of explosions all around.

Let’s hope that the upcoming US "adventures" in Iraq don’t harden the eyes of Hassim with hate. Let’s pray that he doesn’t have to watch his mother die as massive bombs start dropping on the people of Baghdad. Let’s hope what the Bush administration is doing in Iraq in 2003 doesn’t fuel a whole generation of anti-American sentiment in the Middle East.

Twenty-eight members of the Iraq Peace Team, mostly American and British citizens, remain in Baghdad.

(The author is a former copy editor of The Kathmandu Post.)

A new trans-Atlantic relationship

CHRISTOPH BERTRAM & FRANQOIS HEISBOURG

The conflict over Iraq is reveal ing itself as the catalyst of fundamental change - not in the Middle East but in the trans-Atlantic relationship. That relationship has been upended by the determination of the Bush administration to pursue war against Iraq, single-handedly if need be, and by the split between European governments over whether to resist or acquiesce to a war none of them regard as necessary

The difference between this US-European dispute and the many others before it is that it lies in a new concept of American power that is being pushed with a remarkable lack of diplomatic finesse by the Bush administration.

The American aim is leadership through command, not persuasion, a concept made possible by the gap in military power between the United States and Europe, a gap that has substantially widened in the past decade.

Of course, the Europeans are much at fault for their sorry state. They have proclaimed a common foreign and security policy without practising it, and promised a common defence without committing the means.

On Iraq, many governments, including France and Germany, have preferred to look the other way, leaving the tough decisions to the United States; their own suggestions arrive so late that they seem to American eyes as if their main purpose is to block American action. But to hold Europe responsible for the crisis is to grant Europeans a political weight they do not have; the decisive role has been played by the United States

The United States has thrown out the familiar trans-Atlantic playing field. That is what European governments have to come to terms with. They do not have the choice of going against the United States, current differences over Iraq notwithstanding. They need to get along with the world’s most powerful country. But they will be able to do so without a sense of humiliation and frustration only if they can muster greater weight on the trans-Atlantic scale of influence

The European rift over Iraq has demonstrated that a European Union of 25 member states will not unite on any policy issue where the United States dissents. If Europe wants to have political weight it needs to form a core group of countries determined to meld policies and means. This idea, first formulated almost 10 years ago and often dismissed, is now the only idea that can get Europe out of its trans-Atlantic predicament

The core of the core group has to be the two countries whose unity has been the indispensable condition of European unity, France and Germany. But both countries will have to go much further in integrating their policies and resources, and they have to include others.

Going further in integrating policies and resources will require steps that cannot be undone, such as merging the air forces of both countries. Including others will require both governments to end their mindless practice of neglect of and lack of respect for the smaller members of the European Union, evident in their haughty declarations on the 40th anniversary of the French-German treaty in January

Will it work? The prospects are not bright, given the national vanities and bureaucratic reflexes still powerful in Europe. But if Europe needed a reminder of the spiralling costs of these prevailing attitudes, the Iraq crisis and its wider implications provide it

Both Europe and America will have to seek to limit the damage done by their current dissent, damage that will increase should the United States move against Iraq without UN backing. But restoring the trans-Atlantic relationship is no longer a matter of repairing damage and then acting as if nothing had changed.

The United States has ended the old relationship. It can be reborn only if Europe is reborn

International Herald Tribune

HIV/AIDS in South Asia
Focus on stigma, discrimination

JHABINDRA BHANDARI

In the recent years, rapidly spreading HIV/AIDS has been a cause of much concern worldwide. In this regard, South Asia is no exception. According to UNAIDS report, at the end of 2001 there were 4.2 million people living with HIV/AIDS in South Asia-Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. Thus, the spread of HIV/AIDS is a looming threat to development in the region. The creeping impacts of the epidemic on socio-economic development are potentially larger in the years to come. Unfortunately, the prevalence of HIV infections is still increasing.

Hence, the scenario of HIV/AIDS in South Asian countries evidently presents a gloomy picture, as the region is remarkably vulnerable to the epidemic. The report also mentions that almost one million people in Asia and the Pacific acquired HIV in 2002, bringing to an estimated 7.2 million the number of people now living with HIV in this region - a 10 percent increase since 2001. Current UNAIDS/WHO projections suggest that more than 40 percent of the estimated new infections between 2002 and 2010 will occur in Asia and the Pacific.

In the countries such as Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka, there are rapidly developing local epidemics among most vulnerable groups such as sex workers, drug users, migrant populations and others who are made vulnerable by economic and social instability. HIV in India is already one of the largest and growing causes of deaths. Though the data on impact of HIV/AIDS on families and communities are still limited, the stigma and discrimination in the region are most critical and widely reported.

Obviously, increasing infection rates among youngest people is a matter of serious concern. Data from Nepal and India pinpoints that the occurrences of the infections are mostly among younger people below the age of 29. If left unchecked, this scenario poses great threat to development of the countries in the Asian Region where poverty, illiteracy, gender inequality and violence against women and girls are still deeply rooted.

Despite concerted efforts, the achievements are still limited, however. The AIDS prevention and control strategy in the region is largely focusing on awareness programmes with multi-sectoral involvement. South Asia Regional Forum for Young People on HIV/AIDS, which was jointly organised by the UNICEF Regional Office for South Asia and Save the Children South and Central Asia region in Kathmandu from 15-18 December 2002, greatly helped to enhance participation of young people in South Asia high level conference on ‘Accelerating the Momentum in the Fight Against HIV/AIDS in South Asia’. The convention was recently organised in Kathmandu from February 3-4, 2003.

This kind of conferences give unique opportunity to share experience and address growing concerns of HIV/AIDS in the region and to start joint action national leaders, senior policy markers, civil society organisations, media and other partners have clearly shown commitment in the fight against HIV/AIDS. The inclusion and participation of people living with HIV/AIDS in such forums have made positive impacts in the fight against HIV/AIDS. It should go without saying that strong political leadership and commitment become crucial to mitigate the impact of HIV/AIDS and hence create a supportive environment for those who are living with HIV/AIDS.

In most of the South Asian countries, the stigma and discrimination remain among the most poorly understand aspects of the epidemic. Although the countries in the region have made significant strides in prevention and care, the goal of achieving care and support to people living HIV/AIDS has been still elusive. However, it is encouraging to note that over the decades, the prevention efforts have resulted in high levels of awareness and knowledge about HIV/AIDS, and the evidence of high condom use among vulnerable populations is significant.

As a matter of fact, there is now an urgent need to focus on stigma and discrimination, as these are key constraints to break the silence on HIV/AIDS. These are linked to the actions and attitudes of families, communities and societies. Different forms of such stigma and discrimination, which are manifested at different levels and context have to be critically reviewed for appropriate response. Firstly, HIV/AIDS-related stigma and discrimination are most closely related to sexual stigma. The pre-existing sexual stigma is most frequently associated with sexually transmitted diseases, homosexuality, and prostitution.

Secondly, there is gender-related stigma. For example, in settings where heterosexual transmission is significant the spread of infection has been associated with female sexual behaviour that is not consistent with gender norms. Similarly, the prostitution is widely perceived as non-normative female behaviour, and most interestingly, female sex workers are often identified as vectors of infections, who put at risk their clients and their client’s sexual behaviour. Equally, men are blamed for heterosexual transmission in many settings because of the assumptions such as men’s preference or need for multiple sexual partners. Thirdly, class, racial and ethnic related stigma have been associated with increasingly vulnerability to HIV/AIDS, which in turn exacerbates the stigmatisation and discrimination.

Therefore, we now need to move beyond current thinking towards a new way of addressing stigma and discrimination in a broader approach, which takes account of social, cultural, political and economic determinants. There must be an agenda for research and intervention, which offer new approaches of programming and interventions that practically respond to HIV/AIDS related stigma and discrimination. Most importantly, national policies and programmes must create an enabling environment to promote greater involvement of people living with and affected by HIV/AIDS in local and national response. And, no doubt that there needs multi-sectoral approach to save the lives of children, women and men from the rapidly evolving epidemic.