It is said that the inauguration of Barack Obama was the most watched television event of all time. Obama has truly captured the imagination not only of ordinary Americans, but also ordinary people in many other parts of the world. His appeal is not only a function of his being black (and thereby symbolically representing the oppressed, who in the narrative of modernity are subject to the perennial domination of the white people); he is also an incredibly articulate man who has succeeded in convincing many that he will indeed pursue an agenda of 'change'.

Obama is clearly very intelligent and recognises the dangers of raising expectations too high. He has made it a point to remind all and sundry that he is coming to power in the midst of numerous crises, including the global financial meltdown and two costly, failing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But it would be foolish to expect that Obama will adopt a fundamentally different posture towards the rest of the world than his predecessors. He will employ much more sophisticated language and be more measured perhaps, but he represents the interests of an Empire that is desperate to cling on to its dominant position in the world.

The gist of the matter is what 'change' means in the lexicon of the new administration. Given that Obama's immediate priority seems to be the economy, it is important to consider the extent to which 'change' will take place in the economic sphere. The fact that an old Clinton appointee, Lawrence Summers, has been appointed Secretary of the Treasury is perhaps the most obvious indicator of how much (or little) 'change' can be expected.

Just as Obama will not preside over the willful retreat of the United States from the position of global superpower, he will also not spearhead a transformation of capitalism. In the wake of the global financial collapse, most mainstream commentators made hay about the fact that the crisis was caused by the absence of meaningful regulation of financial institutions. By implication, if the state (and/or global governance institutions) reasserts a measure of control over the operation of finance capital, the downward slide can be arrested. This prognosis basically posits that the gung-ho neo-liberal (and neo-con) rollback of the state needs to be revisited, starting first and foremost with the pumping of public monies into the financial system to restore confidence.

On the face of it, this analysis is relatively sound. It is true that a definitive shift took place in the global economic order during the regimes of Reagan and Thatcher in the US and UK, respectively, in which the state relinquished control over many of its assets to the private sector while its regulatory role was also greatly diminished. But there was a deeper systemic problem that precipitated this shift away from the interventionist Keynesian state, namely that consumer markets the world over were saturated by a progressive increase in production, most of which took place in the German and Japanese economies through the 1950s and 1960s. In other words, there was too much being produced without enough absorptive capacity.

This problem was not solved by the new Reaganite and Thatchertie orthodoxy. Instead the problem was swept under the carpet, so to speak. The inherent need of capitalist firms to continue generating profits required a massive 'financialisation' of the global economy. In other words, rather than investing in manufacturing or other productive industry and extracting surplus in this manner, firms started to invest money in stock markets, pension funds and, over time, all sorts of complex financial instruments. Thus, without generating new productive value, firms were making money through short-term speculation. The salaries of CEOs skyrocketed as windfall profits were made.

The honeymoon period was facilitated by the international financial institutions (IFIs), which forced third world economies to liberalise their financial markets and permit free entry and exit of hot financial multinational capital. The economies of Eastern Europe and Russia were also favoured destinations for hot capital, because in these cases the so-called 'shock therapy' orthodoxy ensured the complete lack of capital controls. It was inevitable that the honeymoon period would end, and slowly, but surely, one after the other economy started to collapse as speculative profiteering reached unmanageable heights. The East Asian financial crisis was the most high-profile implosion.

Presumably the master speculators on Wall Street and in other centres of finance believed they would always be able to push off the contradictions of the capitalist system to the rest of the world. But the chickens have now come home to roost and, as everyone is now acknowledging, deep problems exist at the heart of the system. But as pointed out earlier, the 'deep' problem has been identified in the mainstream as a lack of regulation, whereas this is only a symptom rather than a fundamental cause.

Obama made interesting comments in his inaugural address about the fact that America (and presumably other western industrial societies) cannot continue to consume the world's resources in the way that it has. But then he proceeded to contradict himself by proclaiming that Americans will not sacrifice their lifestyle at any cost. What 'change' would really mean is a fundamental challenge to the ethic of capitalism. Even after the financial collapse, most of the first world is licking its own wounds rather than recognising how the system that has only recently caused extensive damage to their own societies has been ravaging the rest of the world for the best part of last 200 years.

This self-absorbed attitude naturally leads to the emphasis on the lack of regulation as the explanatory factor for the collapse, rather than recognise that the capitalist system cannot guarantee a life of plenty for all of the world's people, as well as a harmonious relationship with the eco-system. Indeed, capitalism's contradictions are so acute that things can only get worse if the system remains intact.

The financial stimulus package that Obama has supported in effect is an attempt to restore the legitimacy of an economic order that is in danger of being completely exposed. Mainstream accounts that go on only about a lack of regulation attempt to obfuscate the fact that the morality of capitalism is impersonal and inhuman; everything can be a commodity, including natural resources and human beings themselves. Thus, as Marx said so presciently in his writings on commodity fetishism and alienation, social relations cease to exist, and we are left only with relations between things.

The misery wrought by the financial meltdown, which we are only beginning to experience, is by far an aberration. It is yet another indicator – as the Great Depression, Crisis of the 1970s and innumerable other such crises before it – that the planet and humanity need to transcend capitalism, so as to preempt a crisis of apocalyptic proportions. And in suggesting that such a crisis is possible, I am not, by any stretch of the imagination, drifting into the realm of the incredible. After all, imperialist wars and the contradictions to which they give rise are also products of the capitalist order. In the face of all the glaring evidence, President Obama's 'change' agenda must be held accountable.

Israel doesn't give a damn what the rest of the world says as long as it has the United States of America on its side. Pushed and prodded by the US' highly influential Jewish lobby, America's support for Israel has been unstinting ever since the creation of the Zionist state in 1948.

Since 1979, the US has vetoed 37 United Nations Security Council resolutions that were critical of Israel's actions against the Palestinian people, Lebanon and other Arab states. During the same period, the US has given Israel over $100 billion in military and economic aid, most of it in the form of outright grants that do not have to be repaid.

During the 1967 Arab-Israeli war (which, it should be remembered, was started by Israel), the Israeli air force bombed and sank a US navy electronic intelligence ship named the USS Liberty that was monitoring Israeli military communications in the eastern Mediterranean, killing all the members of the crew. Israel said the sinking of the Liberty was an "accident". The US went along with the lie and did nothing about it.

Israel is the only country in the Middle East with a nuclear arsenal (with about 400 nuclear warheads and related delivery systems). Since the 1950s, however, the US has provided a nuclear cover to Israel. In terms of conventional firepower, the Israeli army is the fourth most powerful in the world (after the US, Russian and Chinese armies).

This is the force that has been wreaking havoc in the Palestinian Gaza Strip in recent weeks. Israeli air strikes and tank fire have killed nearly a thousand Palestinian civilians, including about 300 children, and have wounded several thousand others. The air strikes have destroyed five thousand homes, apartment blocks and other buildings in the Gaza Strip. The cost of reconstruction has been estimated at $2 billion. By contrast, the Israelis killed by Hamas rockets number only 13.

Israel has now declared a so-called 'ceasefire', which was supposed to go into effect on January 20, to coincide with the swearing in of Barack Obama as the 44th president of the US. Echoing outgoing President George W Bush, Obama has said that Israel has the "right" to defend itself against Hamas attacks. US Secretary of State-designate Hillary Clinton is also known to be a staunch supporter of Israel, as is US Secretary of Defence Robert Gates, who has been retained in the job by President Obama.

What all this means is that, even under the Obama administration, nothing is likely to change as far as the US' policy towards Israel is concerned, and the beleaguered Palestinian people will continue to be at the receiving end of Israel's barbaric actions.

Despite repeated declarations from the UN and international human rights organisations, Israel continues to use lethal force against unarmed Palestinians. Such acts constitute war crimes. The killing of a resident of occupied territory in circumstances that are not life-threatening to the army of occupation is willful killing, and is, thus, a grave breach of the Fourth Geneva Convention (Articles 146 and 147).

Moreover, Article 32 of the Convention, to which Israel is a signatory, stipulates: "The High Contracting Parties specifically agree that each of them is prohibited from taking any measure of such a character as to cause the physical suffering or extermination of protected persons in their hands. The prohibition applies not only to murder and torture, but also to any other measures of brutality whether applied by civilian or military agents."

Since the current Intifada began in September 2000, more than 5,000 Palestinians have been killed by the Israeli army in the occupied West Bank, the occupied Gaza Strip and occupied Al-Quds (Jerusalem). The dead include hundreds of children (those below the age of 18). Forty-one percent of those killed were not involved in demonstrations or clashes, and 89 percent were civilians.

The Israeli authorities conducted no investigations into these killings, thereby granting virtual carte blanche to Israeli forces to shoot and kill at will. The number of Palestinians injured by Israeli security forces and settlers since September 2000 totals more than 18,000. The injured include about 5,000 children. More than 78 percent of the injuries were to the upper body. Many of the injuries were very serious, resulting in permanent disabilities to more than 2,000 people, including children.

Since the current Intifada began, more than 3,000 Palestinians have been arrested by the Israeli authorities for political reasons. The number of trees uprooted from Palestinian land by Israeli forces is over 200,000, including 40,000 olive trees. The area of Palestinian cultivated land destroyed by Israeli authorities since September 2000 is over four million square metres.

Since the Arab-Israeli war of 1967, Israel has confiscated nearly 750,000 acres of land from the 1.5 million acres comprising the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Since 1987 alone (when the first Intifada began), Israeli authorities have demolished more than 3,500 Palestinian homes on the highly dubious ground that "they were not supported by the required construction permits" – as if Palestinians needed permits from Israel to build homes on their own land.

In more than two hundred separate attacks since September2000, scores of Palestinian ambulances were hit by gunfire, rubber bullets and stones thrown by Israeli settlers. Palestinians have been denied access to medical care, and the Israeli authorities have imposed restrictions on the movement of medical personnel and supplies. There have been over three hundred incidents of denial of access to Palestinian Red Crescent Society ambulances at Israeli roadblocks.

Hundreds of Israeli checkpoints have been erected at entrances to Palestinian villages and towns in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, where three million Palestinians live. Examples of communities that have been completely cut off from the outside world include Aba A-Sharqiyya, Ya'bad, Um-Al-Rihan, Tulkarem, Qalqilya, Salfit, Haris, Deir Istya, Beit Furik, Beit Dajan, Atara, Kardala, Bardala, Ein Al-Bayda, Husan and Al-Muwasi.

Palestinians are allowed to leave their homes for only a couple of hours every few days. Communities under curfew include the H2 area in Hebron (the Israeli occupied part of the city) with 40,000 Palestinian inhabitants, Huwwara with 4,000 Palestinian inhabitants and Silit A-Daher with 6,000 Palestinian inhabitants.

The occupied territories (with three million inhabitants) have been sealed off from the rest of the world. Safe passage to Palestinians between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank has also been denied. All this has been done in complete violation of the Oslo Accords, which forbid such closures and movement restrictions.

More than 250 Palestinian schools have been forced to shut down due to the Israeli siege of the Gaza Strip and West Bank, depriving some 125,000 Palestinian children of education. Many schools have also been turned into military barracks by the Israeli army.

The economic impact of the Israeli siege has also been horrendous. More than 300,000 Palestinians have become unemployed as a result of the siege, with the unemployment rate in the Gaza Strip shooting up to 47 percent, meaning that nearly half the adult Palestinian population in Gaza is now unemployed.

The situation is not much better in the West Bank, where 31 percent of the Palestinian population is unemployed. The income losses for Palestinian workers previously employed inside Israel is estimated at $3.6 million a day. The shortfall in Palestinian GNP between September 28, 2000 (when the current Intifada began), and December 2004 is estimated at over $ 4.5 billion, with a 47 percent decrease in per capita income. No wonder, an estimated 53 percent of Palestinians are now living below the poverty line.

Meanwhile, ethnic cleansing by Israeli authorities in the occupied Palestinian territories continues. Israeli authorities have also demolished a large number of Palestinian-owned buildings in the West Bank (including occupied Al-Quds) on the pretext that they were "unlicensed".

Such acts by Israel violate Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, which stipulates: "No protected persons may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation are prohibited. Pillage is prohibited. Reprisals against protected persons and their property are prohibited."

Emboldened by American support, Israel has long behaved as if it is a law unto itself, a country to whom international norms and covenants do not apply and which it can flout with impunity. However, Israel should remember that history tells us that tyranny cannot endure.

Nawabzada Khawaja Muhammad Khan Hoti, who belongs to the Yousafzai tribe of Pukhtoons, was born in Mardan on January 1, 1955. Hailing from an influential political family, he did his BA from Sindh University. His father, Nawabzada Mohammad Umar Khan Hoti, is chief of the Hoti tribe. His paternal grandfather, the late Nawab Sir Muhammad Akbar Khan Hoti, was a big landlord and a prominent political figure of the NWFP. His maternal grandfather, the late Sir Nawab Muhammad Shah Jehan Khan, was the ruler of the Dir state. He is son-in-law of former NWFP Governor and Federal Minister Nawabzada Abdul Ghafoor Khan Hoti.

Khawaja Hoti joined politics in 1979 as a member of the Mardan Municipality. He joined the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) in 1987 and became the General Secretary of the party in the NWFP in 1998. The next year, he became President of the PPP-NWFP. In 1988, he became Advisor and, in 1989, Special Assistant to the NWFP Chief Minister. Later, he was appointed the NWFP Minister for Tourism for a short period. He also served as the NWFP Minister for Education from 1993 to 1996.

Due to differences with the late Benazir Bhutto, Khawaja Hoti left the PPP in 2004 and later also resigned from its basic membership. In 2006, he joined the Awami National Party (ANP) as its Central Vice President. After his victory in the February 18 general elections, he was appointed as the Federal Minister for Social Welfare and Special Education. Currently, he is Federal Minister for Narcotics Control. The News on Sunday recently interviewed Khawaja Hoti, who has one son and four daughters. Excerpts follow:

The News on Sunday: You remained very close to the late Benazir Bhutto. How did you find her during your interaction with her?

Khawaja Mohammad Khan Hoti: The truth is that the late Benazir Bhutto was a leader with an unmatched political acumen. She was an international leader and was Pakistan's cherished identity abroad. She was an asset to the country. Both Pakistan and Pakistanis have lost too much because of her departure to the Hereafter. She was a woman of high calibre, born and nurtured in a great political family – the Bhutto family – and tutored by one of the greatest leaders this country has ever produced – Zulfikar Ali Bhutto Shaheed. She had her peculiar qualities and was truly benazir (matchless). She always took informed and well thought out decisions in her political career. She was much more sagacious than her contemporary politicians were. She would anticipate the future course of events and would prepare her responses accordingly. When I contacted her after the 9/11 attacks, she was sad and said this would have dangerous repercussions for the Muslim world in general and Pakistan in particular. The ensuing events testified to what she had anticipated. She had an outstanding ability to identify potential leaders, as well as how to take them along. An excellent judge of people, she dealt with them according to their worth and capability. I personally miss her a lot because she held me in high esteem. When interviews of those aspiring to get the PPP's ticket were being held in Dubai before the 2002 general elections, I had a brawl with her on the issue of awarding ticket to someone. Benazir Bhutto stressed that her nomination be endorsed, which in my view was not suited to the party's interests. Thus, I opposed her decision. The difference of opinion took an ugly turn and I walked out of the meeting saying that if her advice was not to be ignored, then we had nothing to do there. I also told her that she should take the decisions herself and get those communicated to us for endorsement. I was preparing to return to Pakistan when I received a message that she wants to see me. When I went to see her, she smiled and said, "Hoti sahib! I agree with your suggestion, because I have confidence in your political acumen." Then she said, because I was angry with her that day, she would take me to lunch, which she rarely did. On another occasion, after a public meeting in Lahore, there was a discussion about the number of participants among party leaders. Some said the participants numbered 20,000, while others put the attendance at 30,000. After listening to all of them, Benazir Bhutto asked me to give my view. She also told others that my assessment would be correct because I always spoke the truth. I told her that they were all exaggerating and the participants actually numbered 5,000-6,000. She fully agreed with my assessment.

TNS: Why did you leave the PPP if you were held in such a high esteem by the late Benazir Bhutto?

KMKH: Because she is no more among us, I don't want to go into details of this matter. I have buried this hatchet.

TNS: Why is Benazir Bhutto's assassination yet to be investigated despite the fact that the PPP is in power? Who do you think is responsible for her death?

KMKH: I think Benazir Bhutto's assassination should be promptly investigated. There have been many untraced killings in Pakistan and let's hope that her case doesn't add to them. Whoever killed her has succeeded in striking the nation and the country hard. I don't know who is responsible for her death, but it's the government's duty to immediately expose her killers and bring them to justice.

TNS: Do you agree with the growing public perception that the present PPP government is violating Benazir Bhutto's legacy and the party is being run on an ad hoc basis?

KMKH: Since I am not in the PPP, I cannot say for sure how the party is being run after Benazir Bhutto. Only a party insider can be aware of this. I am not in a position to tell what changes have taken place since Asif Ali Zardari became the PPP head.

TNS: Your son Umer Farooq Hoti recently joined the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N). Is it true that you also plan to do the same in the near future?

KMKH: Yes, my son has joined the PML-N, because he had serious differences with the local ANP leadership. Perhaps Farooq thought he would have more chances in the PML-N and that he could serve the people better from that platform. He took the decision entirely on his own. I have no right to compel him in this regard and, thus, displease him. Moreover, he is an adult who knows about his interests. As far I am concerned, I am in the ANP and Asfandyar Wali Khan is my leader. He is like a brother and very dear to me. Moreover, he is a respectable and knowledgeable man who knows politics inside out. If my son is in a party other than mine, what's so awkward about it? This has been done by others in the past too. Wasn't Bacha Khan in the Congress party and his elder brother, Dr Khan Sahib, in the Unionist party before the independence of Pakistan? Aren't Saleem Saifullah and Anwar Saifullah in the PML-Q and PPP, respectively? I would also like to draw your attention to the past. I was motivated to come into politics by my uncle Abdul Ghafoor Khan Hoti, a former NWFP Governor and a PML stalwart. He wanted me to join the PML, but instead I joined the PPP in 1987.

TNS: Don't you have any differences with the ANP leadership?

KMKH: We have been facing some difficulties, but I think they are a result of the local conspiracies against us. I want to make it clear that ministerial or party slots have no significance for me; they come and go. My family has always been lucky in this regard. I have myself held many important positions in different governments. I have always fulfilled commitments made with the people of my constituency. I am locally known as Baba-e-Rozgar (Father of Jobs), because I believe in service and try to provide jobs to the needy. I am proud of my reputation and feel happy that I am not known as Baba-e-Corruption like someone else. Ministries seem attractive only to those who want to make money out of them. I have never indulged in corruption, and have always met my personal and political expenses by selling my ancestral property. The confidence and support of the people are dearer to me. I am not ready to compromise on the rights of the people of Mardan. The moment I realised I won't be able to fulfil the promises I had made with the people, I would resign and go to the people again to apprise them of the situation. I believe in transparency, thus I always consult my constituents on whatever step I take. Moreover, I am an oppositionist by nature. I feel like being with the people who oppose an incumbent government.

TNS: How do you look at the performance of the federal and NWFP governments?

KMKH: I think there are many problems, ranging from that of law and order to financial and external threats to political tension. The federal and provincial governments are trying to solve these problems, but in vain. However, the question is: who after them? Who else has the panacea for these ills? I believe that the Pakistani nation is ready to face all hardships with courage and patience. Unfortunately, the people are not being taken into confidence. The sooner this is done, the better. I think we need to rethink our policies, which must be brought in line with the people's wishes.

TNS: During your election campaign, you criticised the US policy vis-à-vis Pakistan and Muslims. What are your views on the issue now?

KMKH: Pakistan is a declared non-NATO ally of the US. Bilateral relations are meant for the benefit of both the countries. We'll try our best to rid the world of terrorism, but we have our limits and cannot and must not exceed them to have our own polity jeopardised for them. We may be prima facie divided, we may belong to divergent groups and parties, but we are united in that we are not ready to compromise on our sovereignty and national honour. For us, Pakistan comes first and other things follow. It is like a universal truth that we have embraced as a nation. While Pakistan would do whatever it could to eradicate extremism and terrorism, it also expects rational thinking from its allies. The present tendency of putting the blame of each and everything on Pakistan will have to be avoided. It will only create problems and will serve no purpose for the coalition. The US will have to change its policy from aggression to peaceful dialogue with its opponents. It will have to bring a shift in its policies towards the Muslim world. When you support the killers of Palestinians, you will have to face indignation from the whole Muslim world. While successive Pakistani governments are also to be blamed for the scourge, much of the terrorism in the world today is a reaction to US policies over the years. If you look at the large anti-war rallies worldwide, you will see that the US has lost the war of hearts and minds. In essence, the US will have to think why it is being looked as an anti-Muslim power. It must immediately shun its militant approach, befriend other countries and avoid subjugating them. Also, look at the attitude of India. It also accuses us supporting terrorism. It forgets that Pakistan is itself a target of terrorism. If terrorists from India or Iraq target Pakistan, does it give us a license to attack those countries? Certainly not. India would have to do away this mentality of accusations and threats. If India continues to charge Pakistan of whatever ugly accident takes place there, we also have questions regarding its role. When Pakistan overlooks Indian intrigues against Pakistan or the disproportionately large presence of Indian consulates in Afghanistan, India should also reciprocate these gestures.

TNS: What are the three main problems Pakistan's political system is facing?

KMKH: We considerably lack tolerance. Be that leaders or workers, they all try to benefit at the expense of others. They see their party colleagues not as brothers and friends, but as rivals who must be sidelined and maligned to maximise their own prospects. When some vested interests in the ANP conspired against us in Mardan, my son was compelled to join the PML-N. This practice goes on unabated at all levels – local, provincial and national – in the country. Politics should not be turned into personal enmity, as is happening throughout Pakistan. Another problem with our political system is that promises are made, but not kept. Commitments are not fulfilled. Because promises are not meant to be kept, unrealistic commitments are made with the people. The public is not taken into confidence by the leaders if there are any hurdles in the realisation of these promises. This causes public resentment and, ultimately, disenchantment with the politicians. The third drawback in our system is that there is too much experimentation in every department. Policies are made, changed and replaced. Projects are started, then lethargy engulfs those who run it and finally they are shelved forever. Excellent policies are prepared, but they are never implemented. This lethargy has dealt us severe blows throughout our history.

TNS: Where does Pakistan stand today in the trade of narcotics?

KMH: There are currently an estimated 600,000 drug addicts in Pakistan. This accounts for a little over two percent of the world's narcotics business. Afghanistan nowadays is the world's biggest supplier of narcotics – about 7,800 hectors of poppy cultivation has been estimated there. The international drug mafia has shifted its focus from Pakistan and is now taking drugs to Europe via some other routes, such as Iran, Turkmenistan and Thailand.

TNS: How can drug trafficking be stopped or minimised?

KMKH: China and Saudi Arabia award death penalty to drug traffickers, but even then people take drugs to these countries. The narco mafia is very powerful and spread all over the world, thus it is very difficult to eliminate the business altogether. Still, we will have to continue our efforts for a drug-free world. We may not be able to eradicate the trade entirely, but we can decrease it for sure. As regards Pakistan, it faces many constraints. The Narcotics Ministry is yet to have its own building. It has an annual budget of only Rs120 million, which is much less than what is actually needed. Compared with this, the Social Welfare Ministry's annual budget is Rs9 billion. The Narcotics Ministry has a workforce of 3,000 that supervises border areas spread over thousands of kilometres. According to an estimate, every official looks after an area of 10 kilometres to ensure that drug peddling does not take place. Is it possible for him? Compared with this, Iran has an anti-narcotics force of 35,000; while Turkmenistan has 25,000 personnel for the purpose. Moreover, their salaries are ridiculously low, while they are expected to deal with the trade in narcotics worth billions of rupees. They have to contend with the resourceful drug mafia, which is ever ready to invest on them. They deserve to be remunerated well. More incentives must be given to them and to the informers that risk their lives against the dangerous and powerful drug barons. We also need X-ray machines. Small dealers should also be arrested, but it is the drug barons that would have to be given special attention – after all, the small peddlers get it only from them to pass on to consumers. We also need to have more narcotics police stations around the country. Again, the importance of having more hospitals for drug addicts cannot be exaggerated. I am happy to announce that the government plans to open narcotics police stations and Benazir Hospitals for drug addicts throughout the country.

As part of efforts to overcome the stalemate in the completion of the Doha Round of multilateral trade, chairpersons of non-agriculture market access (NAMA) and agriculture negotiations issued various texts in December 2008. These texts embody draft or proposed modalities for further liberalisation of trade in industrial (plus fisheries) and agricultural goods. Pakistan has high stakes in the conclusion of the Doha Round, particularly in the reduction or elimination of industrial tariffs.

Before looking at the NAMA text, a few paragraphs about the background of the current negotiations seem in order. The Doha Declaration issued at the end of the 2001 WTO Ministerial Conference, which launched the current round, provided for further negotiations on NAMA to reduce or eliminate tariffs, including tariff peaks. Full account was to be taken of the special needs and interests of developing countries through less than full reciprocity in reduction commitments.

The major issues are the level of tariff reduction, the timeframe and flexibilities that may be available to developing countries. There is a consensus that tariff reduction will be done through a formula, rather than through an individual approach, and that the Swiss formula will be used. The advantage of the Swiss formula is that it cuts higher tariffs deeper than lower tariffs: the lower the coefficient under the Swiss formula, the greater the reduction and, thus, the lower the final tariff.

Understandably, disagreement is mainly on the value of the coefficient. The July 2008 NAMA text proposed coefficients for between seven and nine for developed countries and between 19 and 26 for developing countries. It was further proposed that developing countries would have the flexibility to exclude certain number of sensitive products from full reduction.

These modalities were discussed in the July 2008 WTO Mini Ministerial Conference in Geneva and convergence was reported on coefficient of eight for developed countries and of 20, 22 or 25 for developing countries, depending on the number of sensitive products or tariff lines they might choose for protection. The lower the coefficient, the greater the number of tariff lines that may be designated as sensitive, and vice-versa. However, the convergence on NAMA modalities could not develop into an agreement, because the talks broke down due to disagreement on the special safeguard mechanism for agriculture.

The December 2008 text proposed modalities build on the previous text and the reported convergence reached in the July Mini Ministerial Conference. Tariff reduction will be done through the Swiss formula. Developed countries will have the coefficient of eight, while developing economies may choose one of the three coefficients: 20, 22 or 25. A developing country choosing a coefficient of 20 will have the flexibility to designate 14 percent of its industrial tariff lines as sensitive, provided they do not exceed 16 percent of the total value of its non-agricultural imports. These sensitive tariff lines will be subject to tariff reduction equal to 50 percent of the agreed formula reduction. Alternately, the country can exclude 6.5 percent of its tariff lines from duty reduction.

In case a developing country chooses a coefficient of 22, it can offer tariff cuts equal to 50 percent of its formula reduction on 10 percent of its tariff lines or exclude five percent of the tariff lines from reduction. A member choosing a coefficient of 25 will not be allowed to designate any of the products as sensitive, meaning that the agreed formula will be used for all tariff lines. Thus, the basic principle of proposed modalities for developing economies remains the same: the lower the coefficient, the greater the flexibility.

The authors of the draft modalities are of the view that they will not only reduce tariffs, but also solve the problem of tariff peaks. In the wake of implementation of modalities, in developed countries, the average and maximum bound industrial tariff will be below three and eight percent, respectively. In case of developing countries, average bound tariffs will come down in the range of 11-12 percent and only a limited number of tariff lines – designated as sensitive and, thus, excluded from formula cuts – will have duties exceeding 15 percent. The implementation period for the proposed modalities will be five years for developed countries and 10 years for developing countries.

The problem of tariff peaks is an important one, because developed countries have on average very low bound industrial tariffs. However, amid these exist higher tariffs for certain sensitive products, most of which are of export interest to developing countries. Take the examples of the United States and Japan. In the case of the former, while the average bound industrial tariff is as low as 3.3 percent, on certain industrial products bound tariffs exceed 50 percent.

Similarly, in Japan, tariffs on some industrial products are in excess of 450 percent, though its average bound tariffs are only 2.4 percent. The problem of tariff peaks exists because in the past developed countries either offered lower tariff cuts on their sensitive products or excluded them from any reduction. The solution, as currently proposed, is to apply a formula that subjects higher tariffs to deeper cuts on an across-the-board basis.

Since developing countries will have the flexibility to designate certain number of products as sensitive, they may be inclined to exclude entire sectors from tariff cuts at the expense of their trading partners. The proposed modalities address this issue through an anti-concentration clause, which provides that while applying the Swiss formula members will ensure that at least 20 percent of tariff lines in each tariff chapter are subject to full formula reduction. It may be mentioned that Harmonised System of Commodity Description (HS code), which is a universally agreed system of product classification, consists of 97 chapters, each classified further into headings, sub-headings and tariff lines.

WTO members, who may wish to liberalise beyond the mandatory formula cuts, may become part of an optional sectoral initiative that will result into duties being scaled down close to zero in the covered sector. Tariff reduction will be done through a request-offer approach. However, benefits of additional tariff reduction under the sectoral initiative will accrue to all WTO member countries, whether or not they are part of the initiative, based on the most favoured nation (MFN) principle. Thus, the sectoral initiative is a fast-track approach to trade liberalisation.

The proposed modalities, if accepted, will have far-reaching implications for both Pakistani imports and exports. Let us discuss the country's imports first! Being a developing country, Pakistan will have to choose one of the three coefficients. One can safely rule out the coefficient of 25 for Pakistan, because choosing this will mean that the country will not be allowed to designate any sector as sensitive and will have to drastically reduce tariffs on all industrial products. However, for different reasons, certain sectors, notably the auto sector, are likely to remain highly protected. This means that Pakistan will choose the coefficient of either 20 or 22.

In either case, tariffs will have to be drastically reduced on most of the industrial products, which means a substantial fall in import revenue, a major source of public finance. Though average applied industrial tariffs in Pakistan are 14 percent, bound tariffs are much higher at about 55 percent. Since the proposed modalities seek to reduce bound tariffs – applied tariffs will automatically be reduced once bound tariffs are reduced – the flexibility of increasing applied tariffs will no longer be available. The fall in customs duties will reduce the final price of imports. On the one hand, this will benefit both consumers and industrial buyers; while, on the other hand, it will increase pressures on the import-competing domestic industry.

As regards Pakistan's exports, there is a lot on the table for the country. Textile and clothing are our major exports and these products carry high tariffs in developed countries: up to 12 percent in the European Union, 14 percent in Norway, 18 percent in Canada, 25 percent in Japan, 34 percent in the US, 55 percent in Australia and 120 percent in Switzerland. Importantly, several competitors of Pakistan in textile and clothing – such as Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Turkey and Mexico – have duty-free access to the EU market – the largest importer of these products. Thus, if industrial tariffs are scaled down, Pakistan will be better placed to compete with other countries enjoying zero or lower duty in the markets of developed countries.

(Email: hussainhzaidi@gmail.com)

A shantytown fire claimed 42 lives in Karachi in the second week of January. After the tragedy, the routine course was adopted: monetary compensation was announced for the victims and an inquiry was ordered. However, this incident and related accidents need a much more far-sighted approach and a permanent solution, because they have a direct impact on the safety and security of human life.

A heterogeneous and complex mega polis like Karachi has many typologies of vulnerable settlements that need attention of administrative agencies, professionals and even the common people. Shanties along railway lines, high-tension wires, highways, busy urban roads, manufacturing units, godowns of hazardous items, petroleum installations, oil depots, power stations, nullah banks and garbage dumps are some of the sites where the poor people of Pakistan live in an unorganised manner.

However, the working classes reside in an even more unorganised way; labourers can be seen sleeping on pushcarts, footpaths, traffic islands / medians and fronts of shops; along curbsides and boundary walls of houses and other buildings; in parks; and under flyovers. Moreover, there is an increasing phenomenon of settlements along vacant plots; poor families and individuals set up shacks with temporary structures for makeshift living.

It is a marriage of convenience between property-owners, who obtain a safeguard against land grabbers, and immigrants to the city, who acquire an affordable shelter. This option is especially beneficial for the neo-immigrants, because they can get jobs in the same localities and, thus, save transportation costs. In particular, one finds domestic servants coming from this type of settlement pattern. In Karachi, the Defence Housing Authority, Gulshan-e-Iqbal, Clifton, Gulistan-e-Jauhar, Orangi Town, Landhi, Korangi and many other developed neighbourhoods display this syndrome of temporary occupation.

Disasters like the North Karachi blaze may be caused by a variety of reasons; for example, unsafe methods of storing inflammable articles, such as kerosene oil and petrol canisters. Acts of mischief and crime may also contribute to similar happenings. When settlers refuse to vacate a site, an invisible hand may launch fire to destroy opposition. In case a muscleman is involved in protecting a settlement, he may dislocate the earlier inhabitants after accepting a higher sum of money from the next clientele.

Fingers may also be pointed towards state functionaries and personnel of law-enforcement agencies in this regard. However, because earlier such investigations hardly made any worthwhile revelation, it is difficult to expect an extraordinary outcome this time too. In fact, the solution could only be found through cooperative action and mobilisation of the concerned communities.

The baseline task begins from the correct and up-to-date collection of information pertinent to such settlements and habitats. There are many approaches to go about this task at different levels. Both the National Population Census and Housing Census are due since the last year. A lot of comprehensive data is generated though these exercises. The Population Census Organisation may also be advised to incorporate additional variables into the fact-finding work pertinent to shelter characteristics for vulnerability assessment.

At the provincial level, the Sindh Katchi Abadis Authority (SKAA) is mandated to collect and update statistics regarding slums and shantytowns. This work was done meticulously by the SKAA until the early 2000, after which its performance declined. This exercise is a crucial barometer of its efficiency. After collection of information, an objective analysis must be carried out to examine the physical and social attributes of settlements. As the standard equation, hazard minimisation and risk reduction could be the two most effective means of lowering possibilities of disasters.

In the public sector, the Civil Defence Department (CDD) has become near moribund. It had many important roles to play, such as training at various levels, preparation drills, maintenance and operation of a basic warning system, and proper record keeping of its outposts. In short, the CDD needs a revival. Fashionable national-scale bodies with hefty budgets may be asked to assist in its revamping and upgrading. High-sounding devices, such as surveillance cameras and control centres, are being set up by different layers of administration with duplicated functions and duties.

There is a need for synchronising the investment and management functions in order to depute multiple tasks to them, including disaster management. Perceptions about disaster itself must be re-visited. Any calamity, whether natural or human generated, can be termed disaster. Effective procedures must be figured out to combat them at the very onset. Input from those stakeholders that have a proven track record of supporting cooperative action must also be invited.

The Orangi Pilot Project (OPP) has contributed immensely to evolving low-cost solutions for common settlement problems at the local level. Field staff and advisors from institutions like the OPP may be invited to device strategies and practices for different urban locations. Other options include using the services of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) for addressing the social dimensions of vulnerable settlements. Rural Support Programmes (RSPs) may also be involved for rural and semi-urban locations. It may be noted that human life cannot be left at the mercy of uncertain circumstances that routinely generate hazards; technical application and administrative wisdom can surely overcome some of the adverse affects.

Fatima's views are endorsed by Fatima's views are endorsed by According to unofficial data, more than 80 percent workers in Pakistan are employed in the informal sector. Mostly, women and their girl children are engaged in home-based work. They work on piece-basis in various sectors, such as garment, bangle work, sack stitching, carpet weaving, packing, football stitching, fish industry, brick kilns, etc. They work in very poor conditions, they lack access and knowledge of the market, they are lowest in the production chain, and they suffer exploitation by middlemen. Their bargaining power and organising abilities are weak, thus their chances of empowerment are also scant.

Unfortunately, no exact figures of home-based women workers in Pakistan are available. Roughly, the number of women in the informal labour force stands at 12.79 million. Of these, 8.52 million women, constituting 75 percent of the total informal sector workers, are home-based workers. Karachi, which generates about 65 percent of the total national revenue, produces 42 percent of value-added products in large-scale manufacturing in its several industrial zones and rapidly flourishing free zones.

Only the Korangi Industrial Zone has about 4,000 industrial units, of which 1,000 are garment and textile units. An estimated 50,000 women, mostly in the garment sector, work in this industrial area that contributes about Rs300 to Rs500 million daily in taxes to the government. Moreover, Karachi's fishing industry earns $1.2 billion annually from exports.

Similarly, Hyderabad – the only glass bangle-manufacturing centre in Pakistan – engages an estimated 10,000 families in 52 bangle-manufacturing units. Over 90 percent workers in this industry are women. The bangle industry is yet to be categorised as a light industry or even a cottage industry. About 20,000 women are engaged in Multan's famous cottage industry, which produces hand-embroidered cloth for clothing and household linen. Bonded labour prevalent in Punjab's 5,000 unregistered brick kilns – with an estimated 35,000 men, women and children in bondage – presents another sorry state of affairs. The agriculture sector is also no different in this regard.

The irony is that the government is not doing much to improve the conditions of home-based women workers. In June 1996, the United Nations' International Labour Organisation (ILO) adopted the Convention on Home Work (C177), supplemented by a recommendation (R184), but to date the same has not yet been ratified by Pakistan. The country's labour laws do not provide any provision for home-based women workers, because they are not covered by the definition of workers in the Factories Act, 1934; Payment of Wages Act, 1936; Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969; and Maternity Benefits Ordinance, 1958. The Labour Policy, 2002, for the first time recognised the home-based work of women, while putting on record the fact that they are not covered by any labour welfare organisation.

Zehra Akber Khan, deputy project coordinator, Empowering Home-Based Women Workers Project, Labour Education Foundation (LEF), says home-based women workers annually contribute $4 billion foreign exchange to the country's economy. In order to give them some legal cover, LEF and Women Workers Helpline, with the collaboration of ActionAid-Pakistan, have developed a draft bill – the Home-Based Workers' Social Protection Act – to be presented in the National Assembly. LEF has also been seeking ratification of ILO's C 177 by the government.

Mian Zahid Hussain, who is chairperson of the All Pakistan Lubricant Manufacturers Association as well as chairperson (Sindh Chapter) of the Workers Employees Bilateral Council of Pakistan, says unionisation is allowed under the country's laws, but the misuse of unions in the past had created problems for factory-owners. Today, the industry cannot afford a complete wheel jam. Secondly, labour leaders have matured; instead of resorting to aggressive tactics, they now want to settle disputes through talks. Hussain believes that if workers, especially women, enhance their skills and productivity, they will automatically find a place in the market.

However, women union leaders have a different point of view. According to veteran union leader, Kaneez Fatima (who is also president of the Pakistan Trade Union Federation and chairperson of the Labour Confederation of Pakistan), the government has not taken any action for the betterment of working women. "The core issue is the safety of women workers. I come across many women who are harassed by their male bosses. When these women fail to submit to their undue demands, they spread negative propaganda against them. This not only renders them jobless, but also disturbs their families, because their husbands resort to domestic violence," she tells The News on Sunday.

Fatima, who has been working for the rights of labourers since 1963, believes that poverty and unemployment among male workers forces women to work on low wages and in unfriendly conditions. Because home-based women workers are not covered by any labour law, trade unions cannot do anything for them. She does not mind the idea of enacting special laws for women, but says even existing labour laws have many such provisions that, if implemented fully, can provide a lot of relief to working women. "The exiting labour laws are grossly violated despite the fact the Pakistan is a signatory to the ILO Convention. Actually, the lawmakers are themselves the lawbreakers," she remarks.

Mussarat Jabeen, who is general secretary of her factory's trade union and president of the National Trade Union Federation (Women Wing), endorses Fatima's views. She sees a bleak future for trade union activities in Pakistan. "Even men, let alone women, do not come forward for unionisation due to their financial, social and economic problems, and their general indifferent attitude towards people's welfare," she laments.

To organise home-based women workers, LEF formed seven cooperatives in Sindh for bangle and garment workers. Meanwhile, an idea was floated to form a union or an association for home-based women workers. Subsequently, the Home-Based Aurat Workers' Union was formed in August 2008, which is now working in all the provinces. As Fatima opines, "Only a revolution can bring about a big change." However, one feels that the government should acknowledge and duly reward the contribution of home-based women workers without waiting for such a revolution.

The age old question of why third world governments are not able to deliver housing and service provision to those that need it most remains unanswered to this day. At the same time, actions and responses attempting to counter poverty and social injustice vary – in method, model and scale. Father Jorge Anzorena has his own workable model, to which he has dedicated the last three decades of his life. "If the world has to change, it is the poor who will drive that change," he says.

An Argentinean born in 1930 and an architect by profession, Father Anzorena's studies as a Jesuit priest brought him to Japan where he later taught at the Sophia University. The turning point in his life, however, came in 1974 during his doctoral studies, when he travelled widely and spent a month in serving the homeless poor on the streets of Calcutta.

"It was there that I realised that my studies meant nothing either to them or to the majority of urban poor, and I decided that I wanted to continue my architectural training with my concern for poverty," Father Anzorena recalls. Still based in Tokyo and officially retired from his teaching profession, he travels across the world supporting poor people's housing; and playing his role as educator, mentor, advocate and writer.

This involves visiting, revisiting and cross-networking community-based organisations (CBOs) across Asia, Africa and Latin America's poor, documenting their work, and "learning" as he likes to say. The bi-annual magazine Selavip documents these lessons and experiences from the work of CBOs and NGOs, because this also provides links between these organisations across the world. Selavip started as a three-page newsletter and is now of about 100-150 pages. "It is a way of showing people who are in trouble through examples from across the world – how they can develop? How they can become active?"

Also a recipient of the 1994 Ramon Magsaysay Award for International Understanding, Father Anzorena has been instrumental in establishing the Asian Coalition of Housing Rights, a network of grassroots' organisations across Asia, and the Slum Dwellers International, a federation of slum dwellers' organisations across Asia and Africa.

Linked with Pakistan since 1978, Father Anzorena has been a mentor to the pioneers of Karachi's Orangi Pilot Project (OPP), now one of the world's renowned models of katchi abadis upgrading on self-help basis. Putting the self-help development approach in a nutshell, he says: "In my observation, there are two kinds of poor. One who waits, doesn't move and says 'I deserve a better life'. And the

other who says 'I need help, but I need to do something myself too'."

Father Anzorena spent the last month in Pakistan, sharing his lessons and experiences, but most of all listening to the different ways in which the poor are striving to improve their lot. Travelling to Karachi, Lahore, rural Sindh and some parts of Punjab, he has been moved the most by the work of grassroots' groups in Sindh, such as farmer's cooperatives, village welfare societies and the haari committees in the interior part of the province.

"I am always been impressed by the work and enthusiasm of the people. There are signs of hope everywhere. We, as professionals, simply need to support these. In Sindh, a lot of people are very poor farmers. But you see people who are resisting, forming groups and are eager to do things; all they need is technical support. Another beautiful quality of these groups in Sindh is the gatherings (mehfils), where they get together and recite Sufi poetry and music. This nourishes people in a different way, so spiritual values are moving hand in hand with development," he writes.

Those that disagree with the self-help approach argue that it is too passive and is like accepting the failures of the government, and that in the end it becomes no more than a process of 'catching up' to the state's shortfalls. At an evening discussion in Lahore, one of the participants asked Father Anzorena: "Isn't it too non-political? Are you trying to absolve the government?"

"Waiting for change does not work," he replied. The model of combining humanitarian values and of actually learning from the poor while supporting them with technical know-how is, in fact, a parallel engagement towards change, of people taking their lives into their own hands. "The government wants to put things in service of the people, but the bureaucracy and the system puts it in the hands of contractors and local authorities – and it does not reach the people. Most of these community groups do first approach the government directly, but when this does not work, they negotiate with the government in trying to find ways in which these resources can reach the people. They try to bridge the gap," Father Anzorena argues.

After meeting with people like Father Anzorena, one gets the feeling that all is not yet lost in the world; there is, in fact, reason to celebrate. One also realises that much of the process of making development doable lies in investing in simple intangibles, such as listening to the poor, remaining engaged with their efforts and staying in touch with the basic humanity within ourselves. "While the greater power structures might be doing the world a lot of harm, it is our job to 'scream' and keep making noise, keep trying," he advises.

The volatile international oil prices, depleting natural gas reserves and environmental concerns are compelling Pakistani decision-makers to consider ethanol as an alternative option. Currently, the country's oil import bill eats up a major chunk of its precious foreign exchange reserves. As an agricultural country with mounting trade deficit, Pakistan needs to focus on substituting imported oils with ethanol fuel, which is an appropriate replacement for gasoline.

This gasoline-substituting ethanol fuel can be produced locally and we would not have to rely too heavily on imported fuel. Moreover, we can also shift the burden from natural gas whose consumption is increasing at a much faster pace than its production. Besides, we can appropriately address environmental issues, such as emission of dangerous gases due to the use of gasoline, by adopting ethanol as an alternative fuel.

Ethanol is an ethyl alcohol and it is being used as an alternative to gasoline in some parts of the world. The ethanol blended with gasoline in grades E10, E85 and E100 is being used widely in the United States, Europe and Latin America, respectively. Though it can be produced from various feedstocks – such as bagasse, miscanthus, rice husks, wood waste, sorghum, grain sorghum, barely, hemp, kenaf, sunflower, corn, cotton and other biomass – its production from molasses, a byproduct of sugar, is considered as the most cost-effective.

Non-toxic, water soluble and biodegradable ethanol is also considered as environment-friendly and as one of the best fuels to fight air pollution from vehicles; it contains 35 percent oxygen that helps in reducing harmful exhaust gases like carbon monoxide by as much as 30 percent and particulate matter by as much as 50 percent. This fuel not only provides higher octane content without any presence of lead, but also substantially reduces the greenhouse gas emissions.

As far as its economic benefits are concerned, the waste treatment process of ethanol fuel is not only cost-saving, but also environment-friendly. The organic components of the wastewater are converted into biogas methane and carbon dioxide with negligible sludge production through anaerobic (wastewater treatment) process. The produced methane gas can also be recycled as an energy source in distilleries to meet 70-90 percent of the country's total energy requirements. The final discharge, after being diluted with subsoil saline water, can also be used for land irrigation.

Undoubtedly, being an agricultural country, Pakistan has an immense potential to produce ethanol fuel. The existing production capacity of fuel-grade ethanol in the country is 270,000 tonnes per annum, which can be easily increased to 400,000 tonnes per annum. However, the bulk of raw molasses is exported, and only minor quantities are converted into industrial alcohol for domestic use and exports. By exporting molasses, we earning only $100 million, while by using raw molasses to produce blended ethanol fuel we can save precious foreign exchange of about $600 million.

Although the Pakistan State Oil (PSO), in collaboration with Hydro Carbon Development Institute of Pakistan, initiated a pilot project to introduce ethanol fuel blended with gasoline in a 1:9 ratio (E10) at three petrol pumps in Karachi, Lahore and Islamabad, this venture failed due to the lack of coordination among various stakeholders, and gaps at planning and implementation stages.

Moreover, no media campaign was launched to impart awareness to the common people about the pilot project. In fact, the government of the time assigned the task of preparing a feasibility of bioethanol use to the PSO, without taking on board the Ministry of Industries and the Ministry of Environment, which were the other main stakeholders in the project, which as a result came to an end even before it started. In addition, the strong oil mafia lobby in the PSO has also contributed to the failure of this initiative.

On the other hand, ethanol fuel is gaining currency in the international market and many countries are meeting their energy needs through ethanol fuel. Through this shift, these countries have not only reduced their oil import bill, but are also earning foreign exchange by exporting it. The United States is the world's top producer of ethanol, while Brazil is the world's second largest producer of ethanol. However, the latter is the world's largest exporter of ethanol and exports it to the US, Europe, Japan and Korea. Similarly, many European and Asian countries – such as Germany, France, Sweden, Spain, China and Thailand – are substituting fuel with ethanol.

Despite the fact that the bio-fuel technology has some drawbacks – such as lower fuel economy, increase in aldehydes' emissions and possible threats to food security, because of switching over from food crops to bio-fuel crops – the same can be overcome by using new technological initiatives, and addressing the gaps at the planning and implementation stages. Moreover, the technology required is simple, cost-effective and environment-friendly.

Indeed, Pakistan has significant advantages in producing ethanol fuel, such as agricultural land, warm climate amenable to vast sugarcane plantations and on-site distilleries that could process the crop immediately after harvest. Moreover, the sugar industry in Pakistan is the second largest after textile and the promotion of ethanol fuel only presents a win-win scenario for the country. Through appropriate planning and coordination, the government needs to restart ethanol fuel initiative to meet the energy requirements as well as to save precious foreign exchange reserves.

It is the need of the hour that the government immediately addresses this issue. Recently, President Asif Ali Zardari was briefed on the subject and some policy initiatives were proposed, such as sustained media campaign to create public awareness on E10, five-year duty exemption on import of machinery and equipment for ethanol production, income / corporate tax relief, facilitation package for automotive manufacturers on import of ethanol fuel-friendly engines, and ancillary automotive components.

Despite the potential advantages, the domestic policy biases and institutional ambivalence are the main obstacles resulting in poor progress on the utilisation of this cost-effective and eco-friendly energy resource. This bio-fuel could also be another option for reducing the pressure on fast-depleting natural gas reserves, as an increasing number of automobiles are using CNG as an alternative fuel source instead of gasoline due to volatility in international oil prices. Moreover, we can achieve self-reliance in fuel by indigenously producing the blended (E10 to E85) or pure ethanol fuel (E100). We can not only save our precious foreign exchange, but also protect our environment by taking these effective pro-ethanol initiatives.

(Email sibtainrazakhan@yahoo.com)