Victims of neglect

Flood victims take shelter from the rains and wind

Flood victims take shelter from the rains and wind. Photo Courtesy AFP


“Since early morning I have been observing the loading and unloading of hundreds of food packets from trucks but nobody has handed me even one of them,” complains 65-year-old Khurshidan sitting at the entrance of Shaheed Benazir Bhutto Auditorium in Sindh’s Mirpurkhas district. The auditorium is provisionally being utilised to store relief supplies.
She is one of the millions of people displaced from their homes by extraordinarily heavy monsoon rains in the southern parts of Sindh. Many of them, like her, have received no assistance and those who have complain of delays and political and religious discrimination. Still others say that the landowners that they work for are forcing them to leave relief camps and resume their duties in half-submerged fields. Across the nine Sindh districts hit hard by the rains, stories of neglect, despair and destitution are everywhere.
The government, on the other hand, hides its inefficiency and inadequacy behind flood forecasts gone wrong and contingency plans turned upside down. “The [flooded districts of the province] have not had so much rain for over a century,” says the Pakistan Meteorological Department (Met Department). For the Provincial Disaster Management Authority (PDMA), rains were as unforeseen as they were for the meteorologists (see box on Sindh rainfall). “It was an unexpected disaster,” says a PDMA official. “In June, the Met Department had forecast 10 per cent below normal overall rainfall during July-September 2011 monsoon season,” he says.
A letter that Met Department Director-General Arif Mahmood wrote to the provincial authorities on June 13, 2011 verifies his claim. “Pakistan summer monsoon rainfall is invariably affected by the global, regional and local climatic conditions prevailing prior to the season. Analysis of the combined effect indicates that total amount of rainfall averaged over Pakistan during monsoon season (July-September) 2011 will remain 10 per cent below normal.” With the letter predicting that “there are chances of about 10 per cent above normal rainfall in northern half of Pakistan including Punjab, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province and Kashmir,” the PDMA had focused on riverine floods (caused by rains in the upper catchment areas of the Indus and other rivers) in its flood contingency plan for 2011. Since there were no prior predictions for severe rain or flash flooding in the lower parts of Sindh, the authority had made no preparations to cope with that.
The consequences of the unprecedented rainfall and the lack of preparedness have been devastating. An interim report by the Pakistan Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission (Suparco) noted around 6,500 square kilometres, comprising mostly fertile farmland and thickly populated townships, were still under water on October 13 — more than four weeks after the last downpour. The stagnating water has not only damaged 80 per cent of cotton crop in the flooded areas but has also endangered the sowing of wheat, a major winter crop. Provisional figures compiled by the PDMA – a thorough assessment of damage and needs did not even begin by the end of the last month – show that around 10 million people have been affected.
The victims of rains and flooding have disturbing tales to share. In the first six weeks after the rains had started, victims say, most families displaced from their homes survived on officially supplied food barely enough for two weeks for an average family comprising six people. “For one week immediately after the rains the government provided us cooked rice twice daily but since then each family has received only two packs of provisions,” says Noor Khapri who is living in a makeshift hut on Kunari-Umerkot Road in Haji Aleem Khan Khapri Goth in subdivision Kunari. According to him, all 34 families living in the village had not received any assistance for the 15 days ending on October 11.
The PDMA, however, claims it had by October 19 distributed three million food packets (see box on ration packs) among the flood victims besides providing them 312,400 tents. The disparity between these official figures and on-the-ground situation across the rain-damaged districts, however, was glaring. The flood victims who managed to reach urban centres – district towns or subdivisional headquarters – might have received ample assistance but those who did not leave their villages – either because they did not want to or because they could not due to financial and logistical constraints – did not appear to have received anything after initial food assistance. No non-food items, such as tents, medicines, mosquito nets and water filter plants, reached them. “Only in the first 15 days [after the rains] did we get potable water through a tanker but now we have to bring water from a hand pump about two miles from here wading through stagnant rain water,” says Mithro Bheel, a peasant camped on a sand dune near his village in union council Bolari of subdivision Diplo bordering Badin and Tharparkar districts.
Many flood victims complain that the official response to their plight was slow. “The relief arrived quite late and is very little,” says Mohammad Bukhsh Khapri, the treasurer of the Rural Development Initiatives, a non-governmental organisation (NGO) in Mirpurkhas. Officials at the PDMA admit that there has been some delay but they blame it on rain that fell in two spells and the rules under which they get involved in relief activities.
The first rain spell started in early August and ended by the middle of that month while the second spell began in late August and ended in early September, says a PDMA official. “During the first spell, the disaster didn’t look threatening. There were estimates that a couple of hundred thousand people would be affected,” he tells the Herald. The rules say that district governments will handle a disaster of that magnitude, he adds. But when the second spell broke loose and devastation spread, only then did the provincial and federal governments get involved, asking the United Nations to launch an appeal for international assistance, he explains. This, according to his version, delayed the availability of relief goods to those displaced in the first rain spell.
Politics also seems to have resulted in selective distribution of relief goods. In almost all flood-devastated districts, I heard peasants say that they did not get any assistance from the government or from the NGOs. Instead, they said, they got their packs of provisions from the landowners that they worked for. How the official and non-official assistance ended up with these landowners is where politics comes in. “We have no role in distributing relief goods. Our job is to handover the goods to the DCO [district coordination officer] of the district concerned,” says a PDMA official. He explains that Sindh Chief Minister Qaim Ali Shah has formed district relief committees to oversee relief work.
In the districts I visited in October, ministers, members of the National Assembly or the member of Sindh Assembly belonging to the ruling coalition were heading these committees. They were channeling relief goods through their local supporters who, in most rural areas, happened to be local landowners. In some cases, the heads of the committees were reported to have distributed relief goods purely on the basis of the political affiliation of the victims. Those belonging to their rival political camp would get nothing. “Food packets and other relief goods are provided to those whom [Munawar Ali] Talpur approves,” says Mohammad Bukhsh Khapri, referring to the federal legislator of the ruling Pakistan Peoples Party from the area.
The landowners also used relief goods for their personal economic benefit to either keep the peasants in their villages or bring them back from the camps as soon as the floodwaters started to recede. They need the peasants to save whatever is left of their cotton and chilli crops (see box on losses to cotton and chilli crops). Roji Kohli, a peasant in Umerkot district explains how his landowner’s men brought 21 families – including his own – back to their village from a relief camp in order to collect the leftovers of the cotton crop. “Our landlord told us to go away when his cotton and chilli fields became fully inundated and the continuous rain completely destroyed our food stocks. He told us that he didn’t have anything to feed us nor could he give us a loan. So we did a 40 kilometre trek from Kunri [a subdivision of district Umerkot] to Thar,” says Kohli living in a tent city set up by a relief organisation on Umerkot-Chahchro Road. “Two weeks later when the water receded and access to flooded villages became possible, our landlord’s men came swiftly to our camp and took all the families back to the village to pick cotton bolls [green pods] from cotton plants not submerged in water,” he adds. In all the seven districts – from Badin to Sanghar – that I visited in the middle of October, peasants sitting in makeshift huts along roads, canals and embankments narrated the same wretched story over and over again.
With water still stagnant in the fields where the landowners were making the peasants work, safety clearly had taken a back seat. In Hussain Bukhsh Marri subdivision of Mirpurkhas district I saw young girls rushing out of a submerged cotton field crying that there was a snake in there. Belonging to the low-caste Bheel community of Hindus, they were picking cotton bolls that floodwaters had not destroyed, Krishan, the head of their family, tells me.
Dr Sono Khangarani, who heads Sindh-based NGO Thardeep Rural Development Programme, believes that many problems in relief and assistance are rooted in the political and bureaucratic bias towards lower Sindh, particularly its 35 per cent low-caste Hindu population. “Last year when the flood submerged upper Sindh, the powerful ruling class which holds important portfolios in both federal and provincial cabinets and which comes from the upper parts of the province worked day and night to provide relief, strengthened flood protection embankments and opened government warehouses of wheat and rice to ensure continuous supply of food to victims for months,” he says. “This time round no such thing has happened because the majority of affected people are low-caste Hindu peasants,” he claims.
While his allegations are open to debate, there can be no argument about the fact that the government needs to plug the political as well as administrative gaps in its disaster management. Another mishandled disaster may not even let people like Khurshidan and Krishan survive to complain about delays and discrimination.

From the Editorial Desk – Shunning Washington

The reports are unsettling: Jalaluddin Haqqani – the latest thorn in Washington’s side, the tormentor par excellence of American forces in Afghanistan – once shared centre stage with President Ronald Reagan at the White House and Charlie Wilson, the American cowboy prowling Afghanistan with dollars in one hand and stinger missiles in the other, called him goodness personified. A classic case of friends turned foes? Hardly. And this is why they are so upsetting — the reports indicate how the United States of America changes partners with shifts in its geostrategic policies and politics. This is bad news for those who look up to the US as the single most important sponsor and supporter of democracy, freedom of speech, the rights of minorities and women in this region.

What if, in the near future, Washington discovers that its support for democracy and human rights in Pakistan does not serve the American interest as well as an autocratic, one-man rule could, regardless of whether that one man comes from right, left or is ideologically somewhere in-between? While it is difficult to predict if and when that will happen, the past is replete with not-so-helpful American engagements with Pakistani dictators of various hues and stripes. The glamorous wife of a charming American president sharing photo frames with the founding father of military dictatorships in Pakistan as a medal for his personal charm as well as political slavishness; an obsequious looking Ziaul Haq being welcomed into the Reagan White House in recognition of mutually shared hatred for godless communists; and whiskey-swigging, ‘enlightened moderate’ General (retd) Pervez Musharraf becoming America’s most allied non-NAT O ally for his historic turnabout on September 11, 2001 — these snippets have only one constant: the Americans don’t give a hoot about democracy and human rights as long as someone is willing to do their dirty laundry in his own backyard. Banking on America for strengthening democratic values in Pakistan is like writing on wind or catching at straws.

Behind the images of Ayub Khan, Haq and Musharraf basking in borrowed American glory are the darkened and invisible ruins of ideologies, values and principles that the march of Pax Americana has left in its wake since the 1950s. Current and the future US governments don’t care if gold-rimmed photographs of third world democrats and advocates of human rights with the Kennedys, Reagans and Obamas just become another pile in history’s dustbin that Washington, perhaps, has added to the most. But this is something that democrats and human rights activists in countries like Pakistan should worry about — how will the Americans treat them as and when they outlive their utility for Washington’s international politics?
Here is a historical low down on their alliances. In the 1940s, communist leaders and parties in colonial and postcolonial countries of the south and east sided with Washington-led allies in fighting against The Axis power. By the 1980s, the Americans had found the Islamists to hit the communists who, by then, had become synonymous with what Reagan called the Evil Empire and the rest of the world knew as Soviet Union. In the 2000s, the Islamists became what George W Bush called the warriors against freedom and civilisation. So, who is next? In the logical order of events, it would be the democrats who have sided with the US against religious extremists and faith-inspired militants.

The trouble with such historical analogies is that they generalise and simplify in a sweeping manner. Of course, not all communists sided with the West for the sake of economic benefit, even on a more personal level; the Islamists were not involved in their anti-Soviet jihad only because it brought them financial remuneration. By the same token, democrats and human rights advocates in Pakistan today do not receive American funds to support democratic principles and fight for the rights of vulnerable groups. But the US has this magic touch that turns indigenous gold into made-in-USA dust and that helps explain why advocates of a democratic, fair and inclusive state and society in Pakistan are always equated with some nefarious American conspiracy to westernise – in the worst case scenarios disintegrate – our beloved homeland.

What is important to keep in mind here is that ideas and ideologies bankrolled from outside have as much traction as a cockroach in cow dung. There is a difference between winning hearts and minds and buying them. Buy you can — but those whom you buy cannot be bought forever. They will keep changing sides to align with the highest bidder. Win you must, but certainly not in a top-down way. The emergence of a democratic Pakistan that respects the rights of all its citizens regardless of their creed, sect, ethnicity and financial status, if it ever materialises, will only become sustainable and productive if it has the groundswell of popular support behind it.

In this also lies a message for all those who stand for a democratic and inclusive Pakistan: standing for democracy cannot, should not, be conflated with supporting the US or be supported by the US. The support for and by the US is, either way, a pact that accrues them little political capital, leaves their image sullied as Uncle Sam’s henchmen and cuts absolutely no ice with fellow countrymen. In worst case scenarios, it haunts both sides as Haqqani’s White House powwow must be haunting him and the Americans these days.

Blame thy neighbour

Tightened security on one of the roads in the district of Chitral. Photo Courtesy Ghulam Dastageer

In the latest flaring up of tensions between Islamabad and Washington, Pakistan’s civil and military leaders are blaming the America-led foreign forces in Afghanistan for their failure to stop the cross-border incursions from Afghanistan into Pakistani territory. Government and intelligence sources in Peshawar go to the extent of claiming that the Afghan National Army and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) are actually supporting and sponsoring these attacks. Mian Iftikhar Hussain, the spokesman of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government, has, in fact, made public statements to the effect that both the Afghan National Army and Nato supported the attacks inside Pakistan. He says there is a popular perception in Pakistan that attacks are being orchestrated to force Pakistan into launching a military action in the North Waziristan tribal agency.

Many people in Chitral andUpper Dir, where these cross-border encounters have taken place, also believe that the incursions could not have taken place without the support of the forces on the other side of the border. Some local residents described that the militants involved in the assaults were wearing the Afghan National Army uniform. They also claim having witnessed unusual movement of the Nato’s planes while the attacks were launched.

“The attacks show that the militants had strong backing,” says Sardar Mohammad Khan, a former military officer who has also served two stints with the Chitral Scouts and is a resident of Chitral. Every insurgent, he explains, would have carried about 50-kilogrammes of arms and ammunition. “In a mountainous terrain it is very difficult to move with such a heavy load [without any logistical support],” he says. That it would have taken the attackers many days to amass the weapons at the border on the mountain peaks and then cross intoPakistansuggests that it is impossible that the forces inAfghanistanremained unaware of their activities all this while, he says. But Sardar Mohammad Khan also acknowledges thatAfghanistan’sNuristanprovince, where some of the attacks are being launched from, is under the complete control of the Afghan Taliban, with no influence of the Nato or the Afghan army there.

A well-placed intelligence source, however, points out that Nato has a massive presence inAfghanistan’s Kunar province which is adjacent toNuristanas well as Chitral and Dir in Pakistan and is a source of many encounters. “We have credible reports that the Tehrik-e-TalibanPakistancommander for Mohmand Agency, Abdul Wali (alias Umar Khalid), frequently visits Topchi Kandak [where Nato has one of its biggest bases in the region] and has even held meetings with the American officials inKabul,” says the intelligence source wishing to remain unnamed. He claims that Fazlullah Wahidi, the governor of Kunar, allowed the Swat Taliban to take shelter in his province after they were uprooted from Malakand division during the military operations of 2009 and 2010.

The source claims that Rozi Khan, the director of the Afghan Reconciliation Commission for Kunar province, has recently arranged a meeting of some Bajaur Taliban leaders including Jan Wali (alias Sheena), Faisal and Ali Rahman with American officials in Asadabad, the capital of Kunar. He wonders why the Americans so successfully target the al-Qaeda men in Pakistan’s tribal areas but fail to do anything against the militants operating in Afghanistan. “Why don’t they (Nato) deploy their troops on the border or allow us to fence the border [as Pakistan has been demanding for years]?” he asks.

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government spokesman Hussain says the attacks demonstrate that either the Nato forces are incapable of curbing the militants or that they lack the will to do so. “In both cases, the situation proves to be very dangerous,” he says. He puts it to the deep-rooted “mistrust” among Pakistan, Afghanistan and the United States. “It is beyond comprehension that all the three countries have military presence on the border but still they cannot contain cross-border terrorism.” For him, all sides need to stop distinguishing between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ Taliban. “If the three sides continue protecting the Taliban they believe to be good, the Taliban in general will continue finding breathing space and attacking their targets both in Pakistan and Afghanistan,” he remarks.