On the side

Nawaz Sharif nominated for Nobel Peace Prize

Herald
Published about 13 hours ago

2 COMMENTS

EMAIL

PRINT

Illustration by Sahar Mansoor

N awaz Sharifs trepidation (fear) has finally reaped awards for Pakistan as the prime minister has
been included in the nominees for the upcoming Nobel Peace Prize for his role in avoiding a nuclear war
between Saudia Arabia and Qatar. Upon hearing the news, former American president Barack Obama
remarked, If I can win a peace prize while bombing thousands each year then why not him?

Why not him? a question the electoral pool has asked itself for 30 years.

Why not him? the same dreaded words Pakistani parents say before rushing their daughters into an
arranged marriage.

My relationship with Sharif is much like my relationship with my wife: it was arranged for me by her
Islamic father, we both had little choice in the matter.

He may not have mass popularity, or any popularity, but Sharif is the hero we got. He may not look the
part, he may not even be the hero we need, but he is the hero we deserve. He is not a superhero by any
stretch of the imagination. Superheroes are a rarity in Pakistan in any case. The one we have, we use to sell
soaps to children.

Just by reading his name youll know Sharif is a man who revels in the path of forbearance, fear and
abstinence. If he wins he is a warrior, and if he loses he is what we call anyone who dies in the public eye
in Pakistan: a shaheed. The great irony of Pakistan is that everybody wants to be a shaheed but nobody
wants to die for it.

A Sharif in hand is worth two Georges in the Bush. America has repeatedly shown the perils of a trigger-
happy president, they have never learned from their mistakes but the world can do better. Pakistan has
gone a step further by electing a trigger-averse prime minister. Not only does he not want Pakistan to go to
war, but he does not want any country to go to war. In this global conflict, Sharif is the little kid holding a
lollipop asking the other children bent upon fighting, Why cant we be friends?

As a Pakistani, Nawaz Sharif knows exactly what he needed to do when his business-family-refuge-
providing friends started a war with his letter-writing-money-giving friends; the answer is nothing.

Think about it, we would never have war if everybody does nothing. If you just wait long enough to be
rescued then eventually the war will end and you will be saved. He may not have Rapunzels hair but
Sharif has always been rescued from the tower when all hope seemed lost usually by a Qatari prince, or
a Saudi prince, or a chocolate prince biscuit; even a princess has to eat.

Much like a man considering two marriage proposals at once, Sharif was equally non-committal when
Saudi King Salman messaged him saying, You up? In an interesting twist of fate, Sharif is not even
responding to the letters written to him by the Qataris. He was going to respond to the letter but he stopped
because he thought writing Faqat aap ka dost at the end would be taking a clear position.

Despite the hate, the Twitter insults and the barrage of memes, Sharif has showed that he has staying
power and he might be on the verge of global recognition for his ability to look busy, do nothing. It
remains to be seen whether Maryam Nawaz will write his Nobel acceptance speech in a series of 140
character tweets or Shahbaz Sharif will hide in the rostrum and act like a live teleprompter.

Upon hearing of his nomination, Sharif sent a cheque to the Nobel committee to buy the prize. He
followed it up by sending a letter to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia expressing the special place the country
has in the hearts of Pakistanis and reaffirmed his strong commitment to the Kingdom. He changed Saudi
Arabia to Qatar and then sent the same letter to Qatar. It is not plagiarism if you are copying yourself.
All Nawaz Sharif now needs to do is to avoid the five-member Qatar delegation that has come to Pakistan
his ministers have advised him to turn off all the lights at his house to make it seem like hes not home.
Frankly speaking, that has mainly been PMLNs strategy for their entire tenure.

This is the first piece of the Herald's new satire series titled 'Newsbite'.

Religion & economic growth

Shahid MehmoodJuly 18, 2017
1

The writer is an economist.

AT first sight, the black francolin (kala teetar) looks like a fairly ordinary creature, but one that
many bird lovers are partial to. The grocer from whom I do my shopping, located in one of
Islamabads katchi abadis, has one at his shop. But it is difficult to believe that this nondescript
bird is part of what drives a substantial part of economic growth in surrounding areas. Let me
explain.

Economics normally takes into consideration four factors of production (land, labour, capital and
entrepreneurship). But what about divine information? Such information is supposedly the
preserve of gifted holy men, in this instance the pirs who advise keeping a black francolin to
ward off evil spirits, counter black magic and build a successful business because the bird emits a
certain cry. This, they contend, is enough to keep the household safe and business booming.

Of course, there is a price to pay for such information, deposited with the disseminator. This
income has spawned economic growth in this area in the form of real estate (mostly the property
of the pirs) and other businesses. Construction activity is the main driver, which provides jobs to
thousands of labourers from all parts of the country. Their earnings generate an entire service
industry specialising in food, accommodation, etc. This sprawling business activity, that has
helped propel economic activity, is based solely on divine information since there is very little
government or private investment that has ever taken place here.

Belief is central to understanding the riches of those

who disseminate religious knowledge.

The gist of the argument is that religion and economic growth are linked, and that link is based
on information that only a very small percentage of the population can deliver. Yet this link has
never generated much attention. Perhaps the sensitivities surrounding religious beliefs are a
contributing factor. Another impediment is the exertion encountered in determining the
direction of causality, ie does the causality run from economic growth to religion or from religion
to economic growth? Put another way, what causes what? This is a very tricky question to answer.

There have been historical exceptions, such as sociologist Max Weber who opined that the
protestant work ethic is what made Europe and the US rich. Economic historian Richard
Tawney traced the rise of capitalism while discussing religion and its significance. British
historian Niall Ferguson reignited this argument when he commented that Europes below-par
economic performance in recent times owes to the decline of this work ethic (citing the decline in
church attendance and religious beliefs). But except for Tawney, none were economists.

In 2002 and 2003, Robert Barro and Rachel McCleary (two economists) sought to break this
impasse with their research. To take care of the causality problem, they took into account factors
that were not directly influenced by growth in GDP. Their most important finding was that what
matters the most is belief, and not the time spent attending a church or religious congregations.
Economic growth responds positively to the prevalence of belief in the afterlife, heaven and hell.
Why? Probably because it instils fear against committing wrong, and incentivises practitioners of
various faiths to persistently work hard. Other findings corroborated some of the generally held
beliefs, such as lower church attendance in wealthy countries (the US was the exception though,
in countries with Christians constituting the majority).

Barro and McClearys research lends support to the connection between religion and economic
growth. However, religion is only a part of the complex mix that constitutes the story of economic
growth. For example, the growth story of the last three decades has China at the top of the pile.
Yet religion is a negligible force in China, where state and society normally have non-religious
leanings.

The research also brought to light the importance of belief. In our example of the pirs,
information related to the divine accentuates and strengthens an adherents belief. This would
also explain, for example, how an economic system and religion can cohabit. America is currently
the bastion of laissez-faire capitalism, but also a country where religious belief is a core part of
society. Traditionally, their mutual existence has been thought to be impossible.

Similarly, belief is also central to understanding the riches of those who disseminate religious
knowledge. The contributions received by the Catholic church help it run a global business
empire valued in billions of dollars. Its properties worldwide cover 716,290 square kilometres,
and it has holdings in banking, insurance, construction, etc. In the aftermath of the great
recession of 2008, which led the pope to severely criticise capitalisms workings, an astute
observer reminded him that almost the entire donation to the Catholic church comes from
economies based on capitalism.

Across the border in India, temples hold an estimated 4,000 tonnes of gold, besides diamonds
and precious stones. There is no estimate of how much wealth is in the possession of Pakistans
religious seminaries or religion-based organisations, but nobody should be surprised if it runs
into billions. Similarly, there is no estimate of the wealth owned by synagogues, but we know that
their adherents pay an annual fee. Money is also raised through different fees, donations and
holiday appeals. This helps synagogues run multimillion-dollar funds. In the eyes of many among
the religiously inclined, holy men are genuine interlocutors between them and God, and that
sustains this drive to acquire wealth.
The mention of religious institutions and their wealth is not meant to discredit them, but I notice
a striking conundrum here. The apostles of God preached simplicity and that the pursuit of
wealth should be avoided. Yet the institutions perpetuating their teachings have no qualms in
accumulating wealth.

The answer to this conundrum lies in historical developments, especially the expansion of cities,
trade and economic growth that ultimately led to the unshackling of certain stringent conditions.
Theologians, over time, ultimately found ways to get around these and give their blessings to
wealth accumulation and economic growth. For the present, it is enough to acknowledge that
religion is no barrier to economic growth or wealth accumulation. And given that the pirs can
have it so good, perhaps we all should seek their blessings.

The writer is an economist.

shahid.mohmand@gmail.com

Twitter: @ShahidMohmand79

Published in Dawn, July 18th, 2017

The wood in the axe

Jawed NaqviJuly 18, 2017
1

0
The writer is Dawns correspondent in Delhi.

THESPIAN Dilip Kumar used an interesting metaphor in his movie Kranti, or revolution. The
earthy couplet went thus: Kulhadi mein lakdi ka dasta na hota, to lakdi ke katney ka rasta na
hota. (But for the wood in the axe, there would be no axe to cut the wood.) The words came to
mind strangely enough because of this weeks presidential election in India.

Though they are constitutional heads, not executive chiefs, Indian presidents, like the speakers of
parliament, can play a critical role in tipping the balance when the headcount is vague. And
sometimes even when the numbers of MPs or MLAs is crystal clear, the chair can devise its own
logic to decree otherwise.

West Bengal Governor Keshri Nath Tripathi, for example, split the Bahujan Samaj Party when he
was speaker of the Uttar Pradesh assembly, giving his Bharatiya Janata Party undue political
advantage. Herman Goering, as speaker or president of the Reichstag, deliberately avoided
looking at president Hindenburgs signed orders to dissolve the German parliament. His agenda
was to take a sham vote to consolidate Hitler as a powerful Nazi chancellor. When he did deign to
see the presidential decree on his desk, Goering concluded it was too late to consider as the house
had already elected a Nazi government. The speakers verdict became the prelude to a global
tragedy.

President Shankar Dayal Sharma need not have invited Atal Behari Vajpayee for an arbitrarily
contrived 13-day tryst as prime minister. The BJP was in a hopeless minority in 1996, and
Vajpayee resigned without facing the trust vote. Rajiv Gandhi had more seats as the largest party
in 1989 than Vajpayee got in 1996, but he chose to sit in the opposition. President Kalam would
have been well within his rights to invite Sonia Gandhi to be prime minister as she had the
highest tally. It is a matter of surmise whether he did invite her. Ms Gandhi had a better chance
of enduring the required vote of confidence than did Vajpayee.

What is astonishing is that victims of tyranny often

become ardent supporters of the oppressor who targets
their flock.

Prime Minister Modis handpicked candidate for president is Ram Nath Kovind, a Dalit
gentleman who was governor of Bihar until recently. He was previously a spokesman for the BJP.
It was a shrewd move to name Kovind as next president, and it has already driven fissures in the
oppositions ranks. The fractious groups for better or worse have put up former Lok Sabha
Speaker Meira Kumar as their face-saving candidate. She is also a Dalit. The current arithmetic
favours Kovind, but we are told that the men in Nagpur who control the BJP are not pleased
about his candidature.

Seen from legendary Dalit stalwart B.R. Ambedkars view, Kovind and Kumar would both seem
to be the wood in the axe, a metaphor Dilip Kumar used for Indians who betrayed their own
people on behalf of the colonial rulers. Ambedkar regarded the Congress as an upper-caste Hindu
party, and he would not have a very different view of the BJP. There are black Americans and
American Muslims who voted for Donald Trump. Dalits voting for the Congress or the BJP is not
altogether surprising.

It shouldnt really matter whether a dictator or a regime is Christian or Muslim or Jewish, or

atheist. What is astonishing is that victims of their tyranny often become ardent supporters of the
oppressor who targets their flock. This behaviour in essence and texture is different from the
Stockholm syndrome as more often than not it involves dollops of opportunism driven by a
human desire to be on the winning side.

There were Jews who supported the Nazis and there are Dalits, no matter how minuscule, who
are at peace with Hindutva. This is regardless of the fact that Hindutva in its essence was
originally the brainchild of orthodox Bengali Brahmins. Their Maharashtrian cousins honed it
into a political vehicle subsequently.

Such deals with the tormentors may involve members of other groups and communities too. It
cannot not be disturbing, after all, that Muslim ministers in Mr Modis cabinet or Muslim
politicians in the BJP are able to sleep soundly without a pinch of remorse when a Junaid is
lynched here or a Pehlu Khan is murdered there by Hindutva mobs.

There are other groups that are critical of Mr Modi but seem to be convinced that there are bigger
fish to fry. The left, for example, is on the same side as the BJP in their anti-Mamata Banerjee
hostility. Loyal leftists are distraught that the communist party in West Bengal sees the staunchly
anti-BJP chief minister as a more immediate threat to its existence, a fear that is at variance with
the way the rest of worried India regards the problem. The fight between the Dravida parties in
Tamil Nadu, or the Mayawati and Akhilesh Yadav bad blood in Uttar Pradesh, contributes to
their collective peril ahead.

Meanwhile, according to the data compiled from Indias National Crime Records Bureau, a crime
is committed against a Dalit by a non-Dalit every 16 minutes. Every day upper-caste men rape
more than four Dalit women; every week, 13 Dalits are murdered and six Dalits are kidnapped. In
2012 alone, which was during Congress rule, the year of the Delhi gang rape and murder, 1,574
Dalit women were raped. The rule of thumb is that an inordinately low percentage of rapes is
reported or gets registered. Dalits were exploited and abused regardless of who ruled Delhi, and
their lot doesnt seem to be heading for a better future under the BJP.

And as we write, another axe is being readied, inevitably with the help of the wood, of course.
There is a metaphor of hope, however, to foil to the axe. It is said that the oak tree creates the
very acorn from which it was born.

The writer is Dawns correspondent in Delhi.

jawednaqvi@gmail.com

Published in Dawn, July 18th, 2017

Panama drama
Dr Niaz MurtazaJuly 18, 2017
1

The writer heads INSPIRING Pakistan, a progressive policy unit.

THE moral and practical cases are clear. The prime minister must himself quit, JIT report apart,
as for months he has failed to prove legitimate his family UK flats. While his sons are the owners,
his role as clan head and recipient of big gifts from them morally cripples him. Sordid details of
alleged huge wealth are shamefully out in public. Distracted, he cannot govern and will damage
Pakistan and its democracy.

But he may quit only if he feels the Supreme Court will fire him. The court started an inquiry
based on mere though strong suspicion via its wide 184(3) optional powers. Many had criticised
this unprecedented act. But it has so far docked a sitting prime minister and the precedent is
established. Thus, such inquiries will now be seen as useful action templates against others.
However, the scope of 184(3) in such cases must be defined to avoid swamping the court that
must coax the government to make NAB stronger to keep its own role exceptional. While that
happens, it must also ensure that others accused of titanic crimes, eg Zardari, Musharraf and
Altaf, are tried soon to dispel any charges of judicial selectivity.

Even with Sharif, sticking to the law or strong precedence is important to avoid political
upheavals. This means conviction only after a fair trial in a trial court, even starting trial only if
the JIT report goes beyond suspicion towards physical evidence.

A flawed democracy has shown its edge over 40 years

of unelected rule.

The law gives the right to disqualify to the ECP but some lawmakers have been disqualified
directly by the courts, mostly where guilt could be shown easily sans trial, eg, degrees proven
faked. Even if the JIT gives obvious proof against Nawaz, the ECP must be allowed to decide. If
he is not disqualified, then we may hit rough weather if the PTI starts street protest spread over
months without result like in 2014. Irrespective, Pakistan will remain in limbo till the next polls.
Sharif can spare us all this by resigning.

Pakistan is seeing real accountability of its top leaders for the first time, invariably under
democracy. In weeding out corrupt leaders electorally and now legally, a nine-year-old flawed
democracy has shown its edge over 40 years of unelected rule.

Had we stuck to democracy instead of looking towards Pindi, things would have been much
better politically today. Some claim that this affair stems from the security establishment wanting
to pre-empt a meek Sharif from being more assertive once he gains a Senate majority and a
fourth term. This idea cannot be rejected outright. But neither can it be accepted without proof,
which may be impossible to get given their opaque ways. In the past, they have acted against
civilians not toeing their line. Are they now so bold and proactive to act against a future uncertain
threat?
It is tough to form even initial views on this issue. Such rumours, even if true, must not stop
Sharifs trial. But they make it more crucial that the trial meets high standards of proof and
process. The rule of law means not just that crooks are tried but also that the trials are fair.

Sharifs exit would not end civ-mil tensions, which are rooted in the simple reality that Pindis
security policies run Pakistan. Political rulers soon grasp this reality and resent so many critical
calls being off-limit for them. This starts a tug of war between the twin cities. We know about
generals (wrongly) betraying their civilian benefactors: Ayub, Zia and Musharraf. But civilians
(Bhutto and Sharif) groomed by the security establishment have (rightly) turned against it too.
The same may happen with Imran, even if he now has the army nod. The man is not money
hungry like Sharif, but power hungry and hates sharing power and limelight more than Sharif.
So, ties between him and the security establishment may not be easy if he wins. His victory is iffy
even if both father and daughter are barred. The Sharifs are a big clan and some will survive
legally to run. The PML-N, representing strong Punjabi groups, will not disappear like PML-Q.
But the two right-wing Punjab parties may become more even politically.

Some say Panama will end sleaze in Pakistan. Sleaze originates from the needs of vast sections of
our economy. With billions of dollars of capital flows coming from China, which is only slightly
less corrupt than us, the needs of much of both local and foreign capital will encourage sleaze and
low rule of law (barring security). Morally speaking, sleaze must end. But the moral lens is only
prescriptive, not predictive like social sciences lenses. However, the former is proactive, the latter
passive. Only by using both can we tackle sleaze. The bi-lens view reveals long-term democratic
struggle as the best tool against sleaze.

The writer heads INSPIRING Pakistan, a progressive policy unit.

murtazaniaz@yahoo.com

www.inspiring.pk

Published in Dawn, July 18th, 2017

Cyber world perils

Waqas YounasJuly 18, 2017
0
0

The writer works in the technology sector.

A MAJOR cyber attack named WannaCry recently wreaked havoc around the world. FedEx in the
United States, NHS (National Health Service) hospitals in the UK, PetroChina and various other
organisations were among the victims.

Due to these attacks, vital services were interrupted, resulting also in a loss of income.

Most of the affected computers were running an older version of the Windows operating system,
developed by Microsoft, called XP. The fact that this older version of Windows had security
vulnerabilities, and that Microsoft had ended its support of the system in 2014, although nearly
seven per cent of computers in the world are still using Windows XP, exacerbated the issue.

It is strange that although Microsoft has long had a monopoly (in the desktop market), it charges
its users very large sums for the support of the older versions of its operating systems, possibly to
leave users with no choice but to switch to newer versions.

How secure is government data?

However, to Microsofts credit, they did make a patch available to protect against WannaCry once
the scale of the attack became clear.

Insecure outdated systems proved to be an easy target for attackers.

There are repercussions involved when you connect to the internet in an insecure way
especially when your job and the data at hand are critical and you affect others around you in a
big way.

This attack fell in the category of attacks known as ransomware, in which important data on a
users computer is encrypted by the hacker and a ransom is then demanded, through an
anonymous online currency called Bitcoin, to decrypt those files. The global security firm
Symantec has reported an aggressive increase in ransomware attacks in recent years.

The damage inflicted by cyber attacks is bad enough in countries where strong cyber regulations
are in place to protect privacy and critical data. It could be much worse here in Pakistan, where
user data isnt really protected and strong regulations are not in place, so the WannaCry attack is
definitely a wake-up call for us.

The choice of machines and software should be based on a coherent policy that serves and
protects data pertinent to the state, its business and its citizens. Let me give three examples to
illustrate how casually important data is handled in this country and how feeble our
policymaking around this is.

First, the way personal information is handled in most of our businesses leaves us susceptible to
attack. For instance, the use of software and data in our healthcare sector can easily be exploited.
Patient data contains very private information, which, if acquired by people with malicious
intent, can cause grave harm. Some countries, such as the US, have strong regulation in the
healthcare IT sector (ie the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act).

The situation here is totally different, particularly in the private sector. I personally know doctors
in major private hospitals in Lahore who do not worry about the way they handle their patients
data. I have known and observed doctors, who work at a very expensive local hospital, keeping
critical patient data on the outdated Windows XP system connected to the internet and not losing
sleep over it.
Second, the way we treat information (digital or otherwise) around our public and private offices
also leaves us exposed. In one major state-owned organisation, some of the senior management
still take a printout of an email and pass it around. Passing an email around on paper defeats the
purpose of privacy and sensitive information can easily be leaked. A number of years ago, the
press obtained an embarrassing set of printed emails believed to have come from the British
prime ministers office. It was later revealed that the information may have been taken out of the
trash by a Mr Pell (who interestingly fished for information on the lives of celebrities and
politicians in dustbins to sell).

Third, it is interesting to look at how software is set up and maintained by our government
institutions. Going by publicly available data from an internet services company BuiltWith, many
of our local websites appear to be based on outdated software programming frameworks and
tools.

Keeping in view the above, one can also probably take the liberty of assuming that computer
systems in our government offices might be using outmoded versions of software, leaving them
similarly susceptible to attacks (if we can learn one thing from WannaCry, it is to use updated
versions of software).

It makes one wonder why our government websites and backend systems are not hosted on open-
source software instead of expensive Microsoft-based technologies, which are also expensive to
maintain. At the least, all of our government websites, computers and data should be governed by
a uniform, yet strong, IT policy to help guard information that is critical.

The writer works in the technology sector.

Twitter: @wyounas

Published in Dawn, July 18th, 2017

Outside the courtroom

EditorialJuly 18, 2017
2

0
INSIDE the courtroom, the absence of television cameras and microphones and the presence of
judges means that grandstanding by petitioners or respondents is rare. The court is a forum for
decision-making in light of the law and Constitution, not a place for political posturing. Outside
the courtroom, however, a very different and damaging spectacle has unfolded in the Panama
Papers case. Yesterday, the pre- and post-hearing theatrics and politicking were on display again
as politicians and lawyers jostled behind a makeshift podium facing cameras, microphones and
reporters. It is a political right to comment on court proceedings and defend a particular point of
view. What is problematic is the backdrop: the Supreme Court building and with it the reputation
of the court as a place above the political fray. The spectacle outside the court is undermining one
of the very few strong democratic institutions the country has; it must stop.

This newspaper firmly supports free speech, especially in the political domain. Too often,
political dissent has been muzzled in the name of national security or institutional integrity.
Many of the speeches and comments made outside the Supreme Court in the Panama Papers case
would be routine for news conferences and television studios. But just as there are norms to be
followed inside parliament, where speech is protected and proceedings are immune from judicial
scrutiny, there are norms that apply to the Supreme Court. In a polity where democratic
institutions are weak, the Supreme Court has established itself as a non-partisan institution. It is
for that very reason that all sides in the Panama Papers dispute have agreed on only two things:
the Supreme Court is the right forum to decide the matter and the courts decision will be
respected. However, the polemics and theatrics outside the court are threatening to tarnish its
independent reputation and reduce its stature among the public. That must not be allowed to
happen.

A straightforward solution would be for the political class and the legal community to themselves
recognise the damage they are potentially inflicting, and tone down the rhetoric on the courts
premises. After the political fate of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif is decided, there will
undoubtedly be further legal disputes with national consequences that politicians are party to
protecting the courts reputation now is not just the right thing to do, it is politically sensible too.
But if politicians and lawyers insist on continuing with the spectacle outside the court, the
Supreme Court itself may want to consider issuing directions against the practice. The court has
demonstrated enormous patience so far and gone out of its way to accommodate the diverse, and
often contradictory, demands made of it by the political class. Restraint was a sensible approach
to begin with, but it may have reached the point where it is no longer effective. The courts
premises must not become a political circus.

Published in Dawn, July 18th, 2017

Sindhs polluted water

EditorialJuly 18, 2017
0

RECENT analysis by the Pakistan Council of Research in Water Resources of surface and
groundwater samples from across Sindh reveals that water quality in the province has worsened
80pc (from 75pc a few months ago) of sampled sources, including at educational institutions
and tertiary-care hospitals, is now contaminated with pathogenic bacteria and unfit for human
consumption. Add to this the extent to which the creeks of the Indus delta have been polluted
with heavy metals and emerging cases of multidrug-resistant typhoid, and we have before us an
environmental and public health crisis of devastating proportions. Unsafe water supply and
inadequate sanitation are responsible for substantial economic and human losses. Children are
the most vulnerable to preventable water-related diseases such as cholera, typhoid, hepatitis and
polio; diarrhoeal diseases are the leading cause of infant and child deaths in the country. Sindh
leads with the highest number of cases of diarrhoea as well as the highest number of deaths of
children under five. This has placed a tremendous burden on the provinces already under-
resourced public health sector.

Water pollution in Sindh appears direr than in the rest of the country, with the provincial
government and administrative authorities largely responsible for the near total collapse of water
and waste management systems. But this is just a microcosm of a larger issue: the states
abdication of its obligation as mandated by its commitment to the UNs SDGs as well as the
Supreme Court to provide safe drinking water and sanitation facilities to all its citizens. The
PCRWR estimates that 84pc of the countrys population lacks access to clean water. The
concomitant disease burden is already more than the country can bear. Clean water is a
fundamental prerequisite for Pakistans progress; no scheme to eradicate disease, ensure food
and water security, improve livelihoods and boost the economy can succeed without a
multidimensional policy to address environmental degradation, particularly the contamination of
our most precious natural resource.
Published in Dawn, July 18th, 2017