Our Announcements
Sorry, but you are looking for something that isn't here.
Posted by Dr. Manzer Durrani in Corruption on October 19th, 2012
Posted by Dr. Manzer Durrani in Foreign Policy on October 19th, 2012
At least seventeen suspected militants were killed in a drone attack in Waziristan, on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, on Friday. The attack by four American unmanned aircraft is the first such operation in Pakistan since bin Laden’s capture and execution by US Special Forces a little over a week ago. The drone attacks have sparked severe anti-American sentiment against the Obama Administration. Meanwhile, the U.S. government has released home videos of bin Laden rehearsing for his video addresses. The material was obtained during the raid last week and was released in order to undermine bin Laden’s martydom. In the wake of the operation, Pakistanis have expressed concern that the US violated Pakistani sovereignty during its mission to capture bin Laden because it operated without the consent of the Pakistani government. Bin Laden was captured down the street from the country’s elite military academy, and the Pakistani military has already been ridiculed for being too inept to capture bin Laden. Pakistan, a growing nuclear power, has had a rocky relationship with the United States. Activist and professor Pervez Hoodbhoy wrote in the Pakistani newspaper, The Tribune, “Bin Laden was the ‘Golden Goose’ that the army had kept under its watch but which, to its chagrin, has now been stolen from under its nose. Until then, the thinking had been to trade in the Goose at the right time for the right price, either in the form of dollars or political concessions.” This year alone, Congress has appropriated $3 billion in non-military aid to Pakistan. However, a bill introduced to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs is calling for Pakistan to prove that it knew nothing about bin Laden’s whereabouts in order to continue receiving aid. Both Republican and Democratic lawmakers have criticized the co-sponsors of the bill of being too hasty to punish Pakistan. “I think people who have been married 30 years still have some problems, but they don’t get divorced,” says House Armed Services Chairman Buck McKeon about the bill.
GUEST: Shahid Mahmood, political analyst, former editorial cartoonist for Dawn, a national newspaper in Pakistan. He is now internationally syndicated with the New York Times Syndicate.
Posted by Dr. Manzer Durrani in Global Issues on October 19th, 2012
Posted by Dr. Manzer Durrani in Foreign Policy on October 19th, 2012
From the early 1950s until recently, strong US-Pakistanirelations were an essential element of American foreign policy in the Persian Gulf. US officials have for decades positioned Pakistan as a first line of defence against America’s enemies – first against Soviet expansionism and then against the forces of Islamist extremism. Since 2001, Pakistan has been the keystone of America’s ‘War on Terror,’ receiving more than $10 billion in American aid between 2001 and 2009 and buying more than $5 billion in U.S. weaponry.
A series of spats between Washington and Islamabad in the past eighteen months have quickly eroded what was once an almost ironclad relationship, however. More importantly, these conflicts underscore the two countries diametrically opposed geostrategic interests.
Washington, on the one hand, is set on propping up a tottering Afghan regime that almost no one envisions surviving without massive amounts of American support; hoping that Karzai’s regime will act as a bulwark against the Taliban and its Islamic foes. Islamabad, on the other hand, is doing what Pakistani governments have done for decades: colluding with Islamic militants in order to exert pressure and destabilize its adversarial neighbors. Islamabad has long seen the Taliban as a useful tool in its endless duel with India and it is simply throwing in its lot with the forces it feels it can best manipulate. Unfortunately however, the Islamic militants are a markedly unruly lot, not given to submitting to outside control.
Pakistani officials distrust the Karzai regime and its close links to Pakistan mortal enemy, India, rightly seeing the Karzai regime as doomed once America begins its inevitable military withdrawal from the region. No matter how chronically corrupt and inept, Islamabad sees what Washington refuses to acknowledge. In the words of former CIA Station Chief in Kabul, Graham Fuller:
[American] military force will not win the day in either Afghanistan or Pakistan. Crises have only grown worse under the US military footprint….The Taliban represent zealous and largely ignorant mountain Islamists. They are also all ethnic Pashtuns. Most Pashtuns see the Taliban, like them or not, as the primary vehicle for restoration of Pashtun power in Afghanistan lost in 2001. Pashtuns are also among the most fiercely nationalist, tribalized and xenophobic peoples of the world, united only against the foreign invader. In the end the Taliban are probably more Pashtun than Islamist. [1]
American officials are well aware of Pakistan’s Afghan policies. In September of 2011, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta confirmed that the Haqqani network, a terrorist network that earlier attacked the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, is a “veritable arm” of the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) Directorate. [2] Pakistan, according to the Council on Foreign Relations, has emerged as a terrorist sanctuary. [3]
The White House has attempted reign in its erstwhile ally using diplomatic pressure and monetary incentives, to little avail. In September 2009, Congress passed bill P.L. 111-73 authorizing the President to provide $1.5 billion dollars a year in aid to Pakistan from 2010 through 2014. Laws attached to the loan stipulate, however, that American aid can only be released if Islamabad adheres to American counter-insurgency policies in Pakistan. [4]
More and more, however, Islamabad has proved an unwilling dance partner. After P.L. 111-73 was passed, Islamic army leaders expressed “serious concern regarding clauses [P.L. 111-73] impacting on national security.” [5] Even more, Washington’s persistent use of unilateral drone attacks in Pakistan, resulting in the deaths of many innocent Pakistani civilians, have whipped up a wave of anti-American furor in Pakistan, and nourished Islamic sentiment in the region. [6] The assassination of Osama Bin Laden in Abbottabad, Pakistan in late 2011, in flagrant breach of Pakistan’s sovereignty, outraged Pakistani officials and the public equally.
America’s geostrategic clout in the region is declining rapidly, as is its credibility. Even though NATO’s forces in Afghanistan are at their peak, Washington still cannot wrangle in the Taliban. Declared a victory upon departure, US encroachment into Iraq nonetheless showed the limits of empire. The Arab Spring robbed Washington of some of its political stalwarts in the region. Two failed wars and an ailing economy have uncloaked Washington’s fallibility and given America’s rivals in the region room to maneuver.
In the backdrop of America’s waning influence in Pakistan lies China, Pakistan’s South Eastern neighbour. The now second largest world economy relishes the prospect of Washington’s diminished role in the region, and has steadfastly pursued strengthened ties with Islamabad in recent years.
When American marines were reported to have killed Osama Bin Laden, Beijing voiced its outrage at America’s breach of Pakistani sovereignty. Both China and Pakistan oppose American plans to maintain bases in Afghanistan following NATO troop withdrawal in 2014. Beijing also provided, and paid for, 50 JF-17 fighter jets to Pakistan. Mutual dislike of India, which both countries see as a regional rival, bolsters the burgeoning Pakistani-Chinese alliance.
Even more, China is planning on investing up to $3 billion a year into Pakistan by the end of 2012; double the annual assistance from Washington and with no strings attached. In China, Pakistan has a very potent counterweight to the US.
Flush with its newfound political leverage, Pakistan recently told the White House that it is “re-evaluating [its] entire relationship” with Washington. [7] The White House got a first feel for the shifting power balance when Pakistan retaliated for an American airstrike that killed 26 Pakistani soldiers by closing supply routes into Afghanistan. While few would argue the merits of Washington’s current modus operandi in Pakistan, the end of the American-Pakistan partnership has the potential to throw the entire region into chaos. Most experts argue that the Pakistani state is one good push away from a sudden collapse – the implications of which are significant.
Sources:
[1] Graham Fuller (former CIA station chief in Kabul), “Obama’s Policies Making Situation Worse in Afghanistan and Pakistan,” May 10, 2009, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/graham-e-fuller/global-viewpoint-obamas-p_b_201355.html
[2] Tony Capaccio, “Haqqani Terrorist Group ‘Veritable Arm of Pakistan Intelligence,’ September 22, 2011,http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-22/haqqani-terrorist-group-veritable-arm-of-pakistan-intelligence.html
[3] Jayshree Bajoria, “Pakistan’s New Generation of Terrorists,” December 9, 2011,http://www.cfr.org/pakistan/pakistans-new-generation-terrorists/p15422
[4] Susan B. Epstein, “Pakistan: U.S. Foreign Assistance,” Congressional Research Service, June 7, 2011,http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/166839.pdf
[5] Ibid.
[6] US embassy cables, Reviewing our Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy, The Guardian, 30 November 2010:http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/226531
[7] Eric Schmitt, “U.S. Prepares for a Curtailed Relationship with Pakistan,” December 25, 2011,http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/26/world/asia/us-preparing-for-pakistan-to-restrict-support-for-afghan-war.html?pagewanted=all
Posted by Dr. Manzer Durrani in Domestic Policy on October 19th, 2012
The current situation is a combined result of lack of vision and poor planning, inaction, lack of institutional capacity, poor governance, and mismanagement.
Up till 2003-04 the countrywide power demand growth was only 3%-4% per year, but rose to 10% in 2007-08 following a high economic growth. The 2005 Medium-Term Development Plan targeted an installed capacity of 27,420 MW by June 2010.However the actual capacity in June 2010 was only 20,651 MW, with a shortfall of 6,769 MW (25%).
About 4,670 MW of capacity was added to the system between 2000 and 2010 of which only 1,619 MW was from hydro, including Ghazi Barotha which with installed capacity of 1,450 MW was commissioned in 2004.
The prolonged load shedding has severely affected all sectors of the economy; be it the industrial production, agricultural activities, offices, educational institutions, or homes.
Ironically, there seems to be no respite in the foreseeable future. Different reasons are given by different people and institutions such as the installed capacity less than the demand, expensive contracts with independent power producers, high system losses, power thefts, and nonpayment by some major private and public sector consumers. But public is confused about the true reason for this nuisance and questions if there are more than one reasons, what are those and what is the relative importance of each. The most important being: what is the way out?
In this article am going to review the holistic picture of the issue of energy shortage in Pakistan, starting with an overall picture, followed by discussion on key factors responsible for power shortage, and closing with options to overcome.
The first thing that comes to mind when faced with energy shortage is the installed capacity of the generating facilities being less than the demand. True, but in addition, we must keep in mind that all capacity may not be available at all times because some units may be out of service due to scheduled maintenance, breakdown, or in case of hydroelectric power, the water level in reservoir may be less and/or the water to be released through the power units is less.
Total Installed capacity in 2009 was about 19,786 MW, net available varies from 14,500 MW in winter to 17,500 MW in summer. Hydropower units lose about 40% of their generating capacity in winter due to lower water levels in the reservoirs and lower availability of water for release through turbines. In 2008-09, total energy generation was 91,616 gigawatt-hours (GWh). The current capacity mix is: hydel 31.7%, thermal 66.3%, and alternate energy and nuclear 2.0%. Actual generation during 2008-09 from different sources was: Oil 34.9%, Gas 32.7%, hydel 30.6%, coal 0.1%, and nuclear 1.7%.
The next important aspect is transmission and distribution. According to the World Bank,transmission and distribution losses in Pakistan were 22% in 2008 which is among the highest in the world compared with 6% losses in China and USA, and 11% in the Philippines.
Higher losses are due to old and inefficient facilities, and pilferage. Distribution losses reflect the difference between the energy a local power distribution company receives from transmission and the energy it bills to the customers. Hence, it includes both distribution system losses as well as pilferage. Distribution losses in Hyderabad, Peshawar, and Karachi are more than 30% compared to 7% to 15% in other distribution companies.
According to the 2008-09 data, the distribution losses in various companies are:
Hyderabad 31.5%,
Peshawar 31.2%,
Karachi 38.5% (includes transmission losses),
Faisalabad 9.1%,
Gujranwala 9.4%,
Islamabad 7.7%,
Lahore 12.8%,
Multan 15.1%,
and Quetta 14.3%.
This clearly indicates high power pilferage in three distribution companies, which is in line with the general information we get from the media. This also indicates the potential of an increase in revenue with improved governance.
And don’t consider that you get all what you bill. Generally, the poor and middle class consumers and small commercial and industrial units pay their full bills in time. However, many influential consumers including the government offices don’t pay their bills in full and in time. Many government offices consume energy much more than what their funds allocated for energy allow, and, hence, they cannot pay and use their influence to avoid disconnection with the result that the receivables keep on mounting.
Commoners also misuse the poor-friendly tariff structure — lowest tariff for first 50 units and then gradual increase for each slab. Consumers in this category frequently misuse the provision by getting many meters installed to get a lower overall bill.
Let’s see what energy mix has to do with load shedding. Each source of electricity has different cost of production, hydel being the cheapest and the rented power plants using imported oil being the most expensive. All these sources ultimately feed to the grid from where the energy is transmitted and then distributed. In 2009-10, the average consumer-end tariff was Rs 6.20 per KWh compared to the consumer-end average cost of Rs 8.75 per KWh, which clearly indicates that the current power tariffs are below the cost-recovery level. The difference is shouldered by the Government as a subsidy which rose to Rs. 226.6 billion in 2009-10, despite the fact that tariff were raised by 34% in 2009-10. The Government has its own financial problems and thus does not pay the subsidy in full and in time. Thus, PEPCO, which has the overall responsibility of managing the power system, cannot pay in full to the power producers which in turn cannot pay to companies supplying the fuel. Thus the fuel companies cannot supply fuel which results in shutting down the power units. This circular debt is a major factor responsible for power shortage at magnitude much higher than what could be anticipated because of other factors like lack of capacity.
THE CIRCULAR DEBT WHICH STARTED IN 2006, CURRENTLY STANDS AT MORE THAN RS. 250 BILLION.
It is important to note that the Government has to shoulder in the subsidy from the budget, the difference between the average cost of energy (Rs. 8.75 per unit) and the average consumer-end tariff (Rs. 6.20 per unit), which currently stands at Rs 2.55 per unit. The current annual subsidy of more than Rs. 200 billion is a heavy burden and is unsustainable. Question that arises is: how can we reduce this? It will be hard to raise the tariff to the point that it can recover the full cost of production, transmission, and distribution considering the affordability of the consumers. The current load shedding whether voluntary or involuntary is helping the Government reduce its subsidy by supplying less energy through implementation of longer hours of load shedding. This, however, is counterproductive for the economy and unpopular with the people.
© 2024, All Rights Reserved by Pakistan Think Tank.
Commentators et al
I do not as a rule go for a second bite of the Cherry on these matters – but to substantiate the rule of no exceptions…
The following are figures extrapolated from various Christian Synods:
Islam is currently the fastest growing religion on this planet.
Presently, by last count Q1/2010 1.8 Billion followers
By 2050 they are expected to be just under 60% of the Worlds population – present population growth prevailing.
Not yet a Muslim (this might change should I live long enough), however, it is a benign religion which places humanity and the sciences first. History verifies this – as does the immense cruelties of the Crusaders in the name of Christianity – indeed the first recorded war criminals….. (Gott mit Uns etc etc).
Christian values, (so called) as we like to proudly announce to the world at large (so much for turning the other cheek) – are hardly human values at all looking at Europe from the 11th hundred onwards until the 20th – a thousand years of wars, murder, torture and a general ongoing holocaust – the slaughter of the sciences and the removal of vernacular knowledge – all in the name of a woman and her son. We, also lest we forget the activities of the Jesuits – have little if anything to be proud of.
The teachings of Jesus of Nazareth as well as those of Muhammad (in Islam Yesu is a Prophet) are of excellent value. That power and greed has turned faiths into monsters is a matter for man himself. Along the same line – anyone educated with a smidgeon of historical knowledge who follows modern events and is a card-carrying Catholic; is in my book barking mad – the Reformasionists comes a close second.
I wish we had more Shi’ite Muslims on this planet – The Sunni’s are a good bunch too – but without the Wahabi teachings please (1723-1726).
Folks, let us believe in whatever we chose – the individual rights of a human being personified. Let us not use another mans faith as a symbol for the ills we self-created in our own, Western Backyards. Let us not drag buildings, bricks and mortar and the Universal rather bogus earthly Father and his surreal trinity together with Imams on faithless missions into this – as I find amongst some commentators who wish for a secular Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq. A Something which is en par with the abject lunacy of the Card-carrying Catholic.
It is not about religions this – or is it? as the Roman Church has never forgotten – nor forgiven being whooped by Saladin et co – do our collective, genetic memories really go that deep? – or is any excuse a good enough excuse for the US Away to attack someone weaker – as they never appear themselves to pick on their equal or someone strong.
9 January 2011 2:58AM