From: Sreenath Sreenivasan <ss221@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: November 21, 2005 6:58:04 AM EST
To: SAJA E-mail Discussion List <saja-disc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: QUAKE: Donors Conference of Islamabad (fwd)
If any of you can consider this for publication, Saqlain will be
grateful. //sree//
From: Saqlain Imam <imam6@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Could you please get this article published any where you can?
Donors Conference of Islamabad: A Failure
by Saqlain Imam, a London-based journalist from Pakistan.
Innocent Pakistanis have again been duped by the Government of
Pakistan along with the international donors who actually did not
offer donation in its real sense on Nov. 19 in Islamabad’s Donors
Conference. The donors announced loans on this day like an
entrepreneur who would not miss any opportunity of doing a
perspective business.
Some of the pledges making ‘donations’ at the best are grants,
which means interest-free loans, while the others are mostly pure
loans with an interest of which rates have not been indicated for
determining the future financial burden on Pakistan.
The donor conference is being considered as a great success, while
it’s nothing more than an illusion. For instance, the tentative
estimates of the reconstruction costs, besides the rehabilitation
expenditure, calculated by independent Pakistani engineers was over
$7 Billion for roads and public buildings infrastructure only.
As against the foregoing, the total reconstruction cost estimated
by the Pakistan Planning Commission stood at around $10 Billion-$12
Billion while the World Bank and the ADB estimates ranged between
$3 billion to $4 Billion .
The huge variation in the estimates distinctly indicates that none
of the above figure is based on scientific calculation of
reconstruction costs what to speak of their reconstruction on anti-
quake designs and principles.
Now the point is to seriously consider why did Government of
Pakistan not agree to the estimates of independent engineers and
its own planning agency.
The people of Pakistan in general, and the quake affectees in
particular do not understand on what grounds Pakistan government
agreed to the estimates calculated by the donors committee which
are around $3.2 billion---too meagre an amount to meet the desired
level of reconstruction in quantitative and qualitative terms.
All concerned, would pose a crucial question as to why and how did
the donors reach this figure of $3.2 billion? Since disaster has
caused sweeping destruction involving all physical structural and
social sectors, the sector-wise break down of the total cost has
not been assessed which form the basis of the estimates.
It's a long discussion, but what one could understand from this
"consensual sex" between the donor community and the government of
Pakistan is that both wanted to have a win-win situation for each
other and not for the people for whom they intend to launch this
noble and long term project of reconstruction. Unfortunately the
period remains unspecified.
One may think what major points Pakistan scored by agreeing to the
meagre figure for the reconstruction and rehabilitation, probably
are :
(1) Pakistan conveniently secured what it was offered/wanted;
(2) simultaneously, it would not be under any pressure whatsoever,
to reduce its defence budget or cancel F 16 or AEWACS aircraft deal;
(3) at the same time, it silenced the opposition in the country by
proclaiming the ‘success’ at the Donors’ Conference of Nov. 19.
At the end of the day, what possible benefits are likely to accrue
to the donors against their financial and physical endeavours to
mitigate the miseries of the disaster area, may be as follows:
(1) the World Bank, ADB and the Islamic Development Bank will make
profits on the amounts of loans so-called donated by them;
(2) at the top of it, the donors will be crowned with an additional
feather of great service to humanity therein.
The Oxfam, an aid agency, has questioned whether the pledges made
on Nov. 19 at the International Donors’ Conference will create
another mountain of debt, which is a stark reality and needs
consideration.
The agency in its immediate reaction, after the announcement of
$5.8 billion by Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz says “Oxfam is
disappointed that most of the money in the new pledges is in the
form of loans instead of grants.”
Oxfam has expressed its fears that these “pledges will prove to be
short term solutions for long term needs”. Jane Cocking, Oxfam
Humanitarian Co-ordinator in Pakistan, says “the international
community risks heaping even more misery on survivors by increasing
the debt burden of Pakistan through these reconstruction loans.”
She further said “It will be the poorest who will be the most
affected by this. Donors must work harder to help them climb the
huge mountain of challenges they face to rebuild their lives and
livelihoods".
The comments made by Oxfam are eye-opener and warrant serious
consideration by the donor community and Government of Pakistan
with a view to taking appropriate measures to avert the
apprehensions and fears referred to above. These measures required
to be debated in workshops, seminars and conferences.
Pakistan and its federating units are almost disaster-prone
regions, hence it is imperative for the national government to deal
the relief operations, rehabilitation and reconstruction activities
through its provincial and national assemblies, and senate which is
the basic requirement of a democratic government.
A national consensus on the estimates of the rehabilitation and
reconstruction costs of the quake affected areas could have
strengthened the government to deal with the donor community and
facilitated procurement of an appropriate amount to achieve the
desired results in quality and quantity.
Apart from the foregoing, one must acknowledge the dedicated work
for the quake affected people rendered by Islamic countries,
international agencies such as Red Cross, Islamic Relief, UK Rapid,
NGOs, charity institutions, individual philanthropists, etc. They
gave a mix of grants and non-returnable relief goods to quake
affected areas in various forms, kinds, cash and services.
ENDS.
<html><div><OL><BR></OL>
<P>Saqlain Imam</P></div></html>
From: Sreenath Sreenivasan <ss221@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: saja@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [saja-disc] earthquake coverage, On the Media (fwd)
Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 15:30:47 -0500 (EST)
FYI...
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 15:24:22 -0500
From: Maria Drago <mariadrago@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: SAJA DISC <saja-disc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: SAJA DISC <saja-disc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [saja-disc] earthquake coverage, On the Media
SAJA MEMBER? PLEASE JOIN / RENEW. IT'S EASY. Visit: http://
www.saja.org/membership.html
---------------
For anyone who wants to hear one U.S. media programme's take on the
earthquake coverage (or lack thereof), it's one of the topics on the
National Public Radio show On the Media this weekend.
Transcript and archived MP3 available here: http://
www.onthemedia.org/
Maria
NYC
-
This is the SAJA E-mail Discussion List http://www.saja.org/lists
To switch to the articles only list, unsubscribe by sending a
blank email to leave-saja-disc-19846J@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and
then send a note to sree@xxxxxxxx asking to be placed on the
articles list.
Give us feedback on the SAJA Stylebook http://www.saja.org/stylebook
