In his latest online Afghanistan dispatch, Jason Burke returns to Buddha-less Bamiyan and reflects on how the Taliban's act of cultural destruction marked a turning-point for the regime.
Jason Burke in Afghanistan
Observer.co.uk, Sunday 5 May 2002 12.59 BST
Article history
It is an astonishingly beautiful place. Overhead a keen, high altitude wind hauls thin streaks of cirrus across the bright, clear blue sky. To the south there are high mountains, covered in thick spring snow. Beneath them there are the rocky brown slopes of the rolling hills sliced by steep, narrow valleys that finally broaden into one plain ten miles wide and full of fields and low mud houses and slender ash trees that are painfully graceful. At dawn their leaves catch the light before anything else.
Except of course the great cliff where the Buddhas once stood. Its sandstone runs through a dozen shades of blue and pink and orange before settling on a washed out yellow. Bamiyan, the high mountain province in the centre of Afghanistan, has been famous for 1,700 years for the two statues of the Lord Buddha carved into the bluffs that dominate the valley. Last spring the Taliban dynamited both of them. It was only when standing beneath the empty cavities, the largest more than 200ft high, that you can appreciate the crime.
To those of us who had been watching the Taliban for years the destruction of the Buddhas showed that they were changing. In a sense the hardline Islamic militia's eventual demise became inevitable from that moment. I thought it was always too easy to accept the caricature of the Taliban as evil, violent misogynists who ruled by terror alone. Partly, I felt sorry for men whose lives had so obviously been ruined by war and who were trying to recreate some romantic, albeit twisted, vision of what their childhoods and lives should have been like; partly through irritation at the kneejerk Western reaction to the Taliban, who had, after all, been welcomed by many of their countrymen; and partly because I had been in Kandahar, the southern Afghan city that was their spritual and political headqaurters, when in 1998 President Clinton had sent cruise missiles to strike bin Laden's bases in the east of the country. Then the Taliban protected me from angry mobs out to avenge themselves on Westerners. I suppose I felt I owed it to them to try and understand before I condemned.
But looking at the ruins of the Bamiyan buddhas - the rubble is covered by a faded blue tarpaulin that flaps in the breeze - it was impossible to feel much sympathy for the men in the black turbans.
We now know that the influence of al'Qaeda on the Taliban leadership was critical in the decision to blow up the buddhas. Letters found in houses in Kabul show that bin Laden and other senior figures in al'Qaeda leant heavily on Mullah Mohammed Omar, the reclusive one-eyed cleric who led the Talibs, to destroy the statues despite, or rather because of, the international outrage at their plans. Ostensibly the buddhas were blown up because Islam permits no graven images. Actually it was a giant V-sign flicked at the world.
The Taliban seized Kabul and effective power in September 1996. Then they were pretty much unconcerned by the rest of the world. Afghanistan was not just the limit of their ambitions but the limit of their worldview. In long conversations with senior Talibs, even as late as 1998, it was clear that they knew where Pakistan and Iran were, had a fair idea where to find the Gulf but were very sketchy on the exact whereabouts of pretty much anywhere else.
But, by last autumn, Mullah Omar was making specific statements about Iraq and Palestine. The change was due to al'Qaeda and bin Laden.
We are now learning much more about how that happened. It had been old mujahideen commanders who had invited bin Laden back into Afghanistan and the Saudi had to launch a concerted campaign to build a relationship with the Taliban when they came to power. He did it well, but not without some difficulty.
I think the crunch point came the end of 1999 when Mullah Omar gave in to the moderates within the Taliban and successfully eradicated the opium crop - at considerable political and financial cost. Instead of the international recognition and aid that the moderates had assured him the Taliban would recieve they got sanctions and opprobrium instead. The question of bin Laden's presence in the country - described to me as a 'liability' by senior Taliban ideologues at the time - was the subject of desultory negotiations with the US and Saudi but that was all.
The moderates had the rug - no doubt it was a beautiful antique Afghan jaldar bokhar 6ft x 4ft - pulled from under them. And the hardliners decided that bin Laden and his associates were right. It was them against the world.
It took me a day to drive the winding valley that leads from Bamiyan down to the broad Shomali plains where the British and American forces have their main base. After dumping my bags on a free cot in Tent Five of Viper City and picking up an MRE ration pack I went for a run. Overhead Chinooks swung low overhead blasting the dust with their rotor blades. I ran past the British marines encampment, festooned with Union jacks and games of football, past the artillery park and on to the old Soviet-built strip. At the A-10 Tankbuster jets I turned round.
Bearded American special forces soldiers were sprint training along the scarred concrete, each holding a handgun. It was early evening. The light in Afghanistan has a hard-edged metallic quality that I have never seen anywhere else. The men and their machines stood out very sharply against the distant plain and the far off hills. To the north lay the Hindu Kush, to the west was Hazarajat and Bamiyan. I wondered if there was a point when the war could have been averted. Maybe at the time of the Taliban's opium ban. And if so, what other decisions are being taken now in Washington and London and elsewhere. And where will that mean I will be running between the jets and the howitzers in three years time.
Source,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/may/05/afghanistan.jasonburke
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Better life main reason for refugees' journey
Andrew Probyn, Nick Butterly
May 4, 2011
ECONOMIC deprivation rather than the fear of persecution is driving Afghan Hazaras to risk their lives to come to Australia, a previously secret government-commissioned report has found.
The Gillard government contracted a Kabul-based communications company to find out what people from the Afghan ethnic minority knew about the risks inherent in using people smugglers to get to Australia.
The report by Wise Strategic Communications, released under freedom of information laws, found that though the majority of Afghan Hazaras were aware of the dangers in making the treacherous journey by boat to Australia, only a few realised they also risked deportation and detention.
Wise, which conducted 50 interviews and 10 focus groups in Hazara enclaves in four Afghan provinces last year, found many respondents believed the risks of drowning and being ripped off by people smugglers were outweighed by the prospect of being accepted by Australia as refugees.
The $72,000 research discovered many Hazaras strongly believed that travelling to Australia practically guaranteed refugee status.
While the focus groups in Kabul found respondents largely rejected illegal immigration out of a sense of patriotic duty and the belief they should stay and assist the reconstruction of the country, those in poorer, less-educated areas believed leaving for Australia was a ''survival strategy'' worthy of the risk.
Of the 7668 unlawful arrivals by boat since January last year, 3306 were Afghan. In this period, only 83 have returned home - mostly voluntarily - including six Afghans.
The rejection rate for Afghan refugee claims is about 50 per cent - up from 10 per cent 18 months ago - but 70 per cent of those rejected have their refugee status confirmed on appeal.
''Lower-income classes feel their opportunities are virtually non-existent and that clandestine migration is their only option,'' the report says about those in Bamyan province.
''The vast majority of focus group participants from Ghazni regard migration to Australia as a livelihood strategy and coping mechanism to respond to social and economic needs.''
The report recommends the Australian government emphasise not only the safety risks from people smuggling but highlight the potential for repatriation and detention.
A spokeswoman for Customs and Border Protection, which ordered the Wise report, said the government was in the early stages of working with the Afghan government on a public information campaign about the dangers of people smuggling and human trafficking.
Meanwhile, the only rescue boat the Australian Federal Police had stationed on Christmas Island as last year's asylum-seeker tragedy unfolded has been declared unsafe for use in even moderately rough weather by the government's leading safety authority.
The AFP has revealed it was forced to slap severe restrictions on the use of its fleet of LeisureCat 8000 patrol boats after the Australian Maritime Safety Authority ruled the vessels were too heavy and could only operate in smooth seas.
Source,
http://www.smh.com.au/national/better-life-main-reason-for-refugees-journey-20110503-1e6ui.html
May 4, 2011
ECONOMIC deprivation rather than the fear of persecution is driving Afghan Hazaras to risk their lives to come to Australia, a previously secret government-commissioned report has found.
The Gillard government contracted a Kabul-based communications company to find out what people from the Afghan ethnic minority knew about the risks inherent in using people smugglers to get to Australia.
The report by Wise Strategic Communications, released under freedom of information laws, found that though the majority of Afghan Hazaras were aware of the dangers in making the treacherous journey by boat to Australia, only a few realised they also risked deportation and detention.
Wise, which conducted 50 interviews and 10 focus groups in Hazara enclaves in four Afghan provinces last year, found many respondents believed the risks of drowning and being ripped off by people smugglers were outweighed by the prospect of being accepted by Australia as refugees.
The $72,000 research discovered many Hazaras strongly believed that travelling to Australia practically guaranteed refugee status.
While the focus groups in Kabul found respondents largely rejected illegal immigration out of a sense of patriotic duty and the belief they should stay and assist the reconstruction of the country, those in poorer, less-educated areas believed leaving for Australia was a ''survival strategy'' worthy of the risk.
Of the 7668 unlawful arrivals by boat since January last year, 3306 were Afghan. In this period, only 83 have returned home - mostly voluntarily - including six Afghans.
The rejection rate for Afghan refugee claims is about 50 per cent - up from 10 per cent 18 months ago - but 70 per cent of those rejected have their refugee status confirmed on appeal.
''Lower-income classes feel their opportunities are virtually non-existent and that clandestine migration is their only option,'' the report says about those in Bamyan province.
''The vast majority of focus group participants from Ghazni regard migration to Australia as a livelihood strategy and coping mechanism to respond to social and economic needs.''
The report recommends the Australian government emphasise not only the safety risks from people smuggling but highlight the potential for repatriation and detention.
A spokeswoman for Customs and Border Protection, which ordered the Wise report, said the government was in the early stages of working with the Afghan government on a public information campaign about the dangers of people smuggling and human trafficking.
Meanwhile, the only rescue boat the Australian Federal Police had stationed on Christmas Island as last year's asylum-seeker tragedy unfolded has been declared unsafe for use in even moderately rough weather by the government's leading safety authority.
The AFP has revealed it was forced to slap severe restrictions on the use of its fleet of LeisureCat 8000 patrol boats after the Australian Maritime Safety Authority ruled the vessels were too heavy and could only operate in smooth seas.
Source,
http://www.smh.com.au/national/better-life-main-reason-for-refugees-journey-20110503-1e6ui.html
Monday, May 2, 2011
Osama Bin Laden Reported Dead
Washington : DC : USA | May 01, 2011 BY Robert Weller
President Obama announced late this evening that U.S. forces had killed Osama Bin Laden in Pakistan and recovered and identified his body. He said a team of Americans killed Osama in a firefight, suffered no casualties and avoided civilian casualties. Pakistan assisted in the operation.
"Tonight, I can report to the people of the United States and the world, the United States had carried an operation that has killed Osama Bin Laden, a terrorist responsible for killing thousands of innocent people," Obama said in a statement.
Others Al-Qaeda members also died. A U.S. helicopter apparently crashed due to mechanical failure but there were no casualities.
"Today, at my direction, the United States carried out that operation... they killed Osama Bin Laden and took custody of his body," the president said at a surprise news conference.
As the news spread on TV and social networks thousands of cheering people surrounded the White House. Thousands gathered at Ground Zero in lower Manhattan.
It is a major victory for Obama and nations vicitimized by Bin Laden's terror. Although it probably won't shut down Al-Qaeda, he has been a symbol who will be hard to replace.
It also changes the equation in Afghanistan. It has been estimated that there are only 100 Al-Qaeda fighters in Afghanistan, and therefore the U.S. could begin pulling troops out sooner.
Presumably the body was identified definitively, possibly with DNA.
CNN said Bin Laden, 54, was killed in a mansion in the city of Abbotabad, not far from Islamabad, the capital of Pakistan. A small team of Navy Seals shot Obama, CNN said.
He was born in Saudi Arabia to a wealthy family. After he finished college in 1979 Bin Laden went to Afghanistan to join the war against the Russian invasion.
He later became involved in other Islamic terrorist groups.
Wikipedia gives this report on his activities: "It is believed that the first bombing attack involving bin Laden was the December 29, 1992 bombing of the Gold Mihor Hotel in Aden in which two people were killed.[68]
It was after this bombing that al-Qaeda was reported to have developed its justification for the killing of innocent people. According to a fatwa issued by Mamdouh Mahmud Salim, the killing of someone standing near the enemy is justified because any innocent bystander will find their proper reward in death, going to Jannah (Paradise) if they were good Muslims and to Jahannam (hell) if they were bad or non-believers.[69] The fatwa was issued to al-Qaeda members but not the general public.
In the 1990s bin Laden's al-Qaeda assisted jihadis financially and sometimes militarily in Algeria, Egypt and Afghanistan. In 1992 or 1993 bin Laden sent an emissary, Qari el-Said, with $40,000 to Algeria to aid the Islamists and urge war rather than negotiation with the government. Their advice was heeded but the war that followed killed 150,000–200,000 Algerians and ended with Islamist surrender to the government.
Another effort by bin Laden was the funding of the Luxor massacre of November 17, 1997,[70][71][72] which killed 62 civilians, but so revolted the Egyptian public that it turned against Islamist terror. In mid-1997, the Northern Alliance threatened to overrun Jalalabad, causing Bin Laden to abandon his Nazim Jihad compound and move his operations to Tarnak Farms in the south.[73]
In 1998, Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri co-signed a fatwa in the name of the World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders which declared the killing of North Americans and their allies an "individual duty for every Muslim" to "liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque (in Jerusalem) and the holy mosque (in Mecca) from their grip".[75][76] At the public announcement of the fatwa bin Laden announced that North Americans are "very easy targets." He told the attending journalists, "You will see the results of this in a very short time."[77]
In December 1998, the Director of Central Intelligence Counterterrorist Center reported to the president that al-Qaeda was preparing for attacks in the USA, including the training of personnel to hijack aircraft.[78]
At the end of 2000, Richard Clarke revealed that Islamic militants headed by bin Laden had planned a triple attack on January 3, 2000 which would have included bombings in Jordan of the Radisson SAS Hotel in Amman and tourists at Mount Nebo and a site on the Jordan River, the sinking of the destroyer USS The Sullivans in Yemen, as well as an attack on a target within the United States. The plan was foiled by the arrest of the Jordanian terrorist cell, the sinking of the explosive-filled skiff intended to target the destroyer, and the arrest of Ahmed Ressam."
Source,
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/8948693-osama-bin-laden-reported-dead
President Obama announced late this evening that U.S. forces had killed Osama Bin Laden in Pakistan and recovered and identified his body. He said a team of Americans killed Osama in a firefight, suffered no casualties and avoided civilian casualties. Pakistan assisted in the operation.
"Tonight, I can report to the people of the United States and the world, the United States had carried an operation that has killed Osama Bin Laden, a terrorist responsible for killing thousands of innocent people," Obama said in a statement.
Others Al-Qaeda members also died. A U.S. helicopter apparently crashed due to mechanical failure but there were no casualities.
"Today, at my direction, the United States carried out that operation... they killed Osama Bin Laden and took custody of his body," the president said at a surprise news conference.
As the news spread on TV and social networks thousands of cheering people surrounded the White House. Thousands gathered at Ground Zero in lower Manhattan.
It is a major victory for Obama and nations vicitimized by Bin Laden's terror. Although it probably won't shut down Al-Qaeda, he has been a symbol who will be hard to replace.
It also changes the equation in Afghanistan. It has been estimated that there are only 100 Al-Qaeda fighters in Afghanistan, and therefore the U.S. could begin pulling troops out sooner.
Presumably the body was identified definitively, possibly with DNA.
CNN said Bin Laden, 54, was killed in a mansion in the city of Abbotabad, not far from Islamabad, the capital of Pakistan. A small team of Navy Seals shot Obama, CNN said.
He was born in Saudi Arabia to a wealthy family. After he finished college in 1979 Bin Laden went to Afghanistan to join the war against the Russian invasion.
He later became involved in other Islamic terrorist groups.
Wikipedia gives this report on his activities: "It is believed that the first bombing attack involving bin Laden was the December 29, 1992 bombing of the Gold Mihor Hotel in Aden in which two people were killed.[68]
It was after this bombing that al-Qaeda was reported to have developed its justification for the killing of innocent people. According to a fatwa issued by Mamdouh Mahmud Salim, the killing of someone standing near the enemy is justified because any innocent bystander will find their proper reward in death, going to Jannah (Paradise) if they were good Muslims and to Jahannam (hell) if they were bad or non-believers.[69] The fatwa was issued to al-Qaeda members but not the general public.
In the 1990s bin Laden's al-Qaeda assisted jihadis financially and sometimes militarily in Algeria, Egypt and Afghanistan. In 1992 or 1993 bin Laden sent an emissary, Qari el-Said, with $40,000 to Algeria to aid the Islamists and urge war rather than negotiation with the government. Their advice was heeded but the war that followed killed 150,000–200,000 Algerians and ended with Islamist surrender to the government.
Another effort by bin Laden was the funding of the Luxor massacre of November 17, 1997,[70][71][72] which killed 62 civilians, but so revolted the Egyptian public that it turned against Islamist terror. In mid-1997, the Northern Alliance threatened to overrun Jalalabad, causing Bin Laden to abandon his Nazim Jihad compound and move his operations to Tarnak Farms in the south.[73]
A later effort that did succeed was an attack on the city of Mazar-e-Sharif in Afghanistan. Bin Laden helped cement his alliance with his hosts the Taliban by sending several hundred of his Afghan Arab fighters along to help the Taliban kill between five and six thousand Hazaras overrunning the city.[74]
In 1998, Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri co-signed a fatwa in the name of the World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders which declared the killing of North Americans and their allies an "individual duty for every Muslim" to "liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque (in Jerusalem) and the holy mosque (in Mecca) from their grip".[75][76] At the public announcement of the fatwa bin Laden announced that North Americans are "very easy targets." He told the attending journalists, "You will see the results of this in a very short time."[77]
In December 1998, the Director of Central Intelligence Counterterrorist Center reported to the president that al-Qaeda was preparing for attacks in the USA, including the training of personnel to hijack aircraft.[78]
At the end of 2000, Richard Clarke revealed that Islamic militants headed by bin Laden had planned a triple attack on January 3, 2000 which would have included bombings in Jordan of the Radisson SAS Hotel in Amman and tourists at Mount Nebo and a site on the Jordan River, the sinking of the destroyer USS The Sullivans in Yemen, as well as an attack on a target within the United States. The plan was foiled by the arrest of the Jordanian terrorist cell, the sinking of the explosive-filled skiff intended to target the destroyer, and the arrest of Ahmed Ressam."
Source,
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/8948693-osama-bin-laden-reported-dead
Sunday, May 1, 2011
نصب چراغ نفتی در چهارراهی در بامیان در اعتراض به نبود برق
به روز شده: 14:38 گرينويچ - 01 مه 2011 - 11 اردیبهشت 1390
مردم بامیان می گویند که این چراغ را در چهارراه اصلی این شهر نصب کرده اند تا مقامات به حال آنها توجه کنند
شماری از ساکنان ولایت بامیان در راهپیمایی به مناسبت روز جهانی کارگر نسبت به آنچه که بی توجهی دولت در زمینه تولید برق در بامیان خوانده شده، انتقاد کردهاند.
در ولایت بامیان برق دولتی وجود ندارد و مردم معمولا برای روشن کردن خانه های خود در شبها از چراغ های نفتی و انرژی برق ژنراتور (شخصی) استفاده می کنند.
این معترضان که شمار آنها به صدها تن می رسید، ضمن انتقاد از کندی روند بازسازی در این ولایت، دولت افغانستان را متهم به بی توجهی نسبت به ساختن سدی بر فراز رودخانه بامیان و تولید برق آبی در این ولایت کرده اند.
موسی شفق استاد دانشگاه بامیان و از مسئولان بنیاد توازن، که از برگزار کنندگان این راهپیمایی بوده است، به بی بی سی گفت: "هدف از اقدام امروز این بود که بخشی از وضعیت زندگی مردم بامیان به نمایش گذاشته شود و آن محروم بودن از نعمت برق در دنیای امروز و در قرن بیست و یکم است."
محمد صادق علی یار یکی دیگر از برگزارکنندگان این راهپیمایی به بی بی سی گفت که نبود انرژی برق در بامیان بر افزایش بیکاری در این ولایت نیز افزوده است. او تاکید کرد که دولت باید از امکانات موجود برای تولید انرژی برق در بامیان استفاده کند و مقدمات کار تولید برق را فراهم کند.
آقای علی یار گفت: "با توجه به ظرفیت هایی برای تولید برق در بامیان وجود دارد و آب زیادی که بامیان دارد، متاسفانه در زمینه تولید برق، که اساس زندگی صعنتی و کارهای کوچک و بزرگ است، هیچ کاری صورت نگرفته است.
در بخشی از قعطنامه ای که در پایان این راهپیمایی صادر شد، آمده است که "بامیان هنوز در تاریکی است" و این ولایت "یکسره به فراموشی سپرده شده است".
معترضان بامیان همچنین در قعطنامه خود نوشتهاند: "زندگی شهری در بامیان معاصر محروم بودن از انرژی، خزیدن به مغارهها تلقی و تفسیر میشود که سیاستمداران محافظهکار این جغرافیا و تاریخ این وضعیت را همواره به انکار گرفته است."
آنها مقامهای دولت را متهم به "تبعیض" علیه خود کرده و تاکید کرده در قعطنامه خود نوشته اند: "تبعیض ناسالم سیاسی پدیده رنج آوری است که نسبت به بامیان از سوی بعضی مقامات درجه یک این کشور روا داشته میشود. امیدواریم که این خصیصه ضدانسانی از هر کجا که ریشه دارد شناسایی و برای رفع آن اقدام گردد."
ساکنان ولایت بامیان در بخشی از راهپیمایی خود در جاده اصلی شهر بامیان، اقدام به نصب یک چراغ بزرگ نفتی در میدان نزدیک به بازار اصلی این شهر کردند و از نهادهای ولایتی درخواست کردند که این میدان به نام "اریکین" (چراغ نفتی) نامگذاری شود.
محمد صادق علی یار گفت: "ما به گونه نمادین چراغ اریکینی را در یکی از میدانهای بامیان نصب کرده ایم تا تمام کسانی که در اداره افغانستان دستی دارند، متوجه شوند که مردم هنوز هم از این چراغ استفاده می کنند."
بیشتر مردم بامیان از چراغ نفتی استفاده می کنند
حبیبه سرابی، والی بامیان در واکنش به عتراض ساکنان بامیان به بی بی سی گفت که تا حال اقدام موثری برای تولید برق در این ولایت صورت نگرفته و او به همین دلیل اعتراض مردم بامیان را "بر حق" دانست.
خانم سرابی گفت: "تظاهرات مردم را برحق می دانیم و این یک حرکت مدنی بود. واقعا در بامیان برق وجود ندارد. هنوز در این مورد اقدام موثری از طرفت دولت مرکزی صورت نگرفته است. البته اداره محلی ولایت بامیان تلاش هایی در این زمینه کرده است."
والی بامیان گفت که با توجه به نقشه فرهنگی شهر بامیان، لازم است که همه سیمکشی های شبکه برق این شهر باید از زیر زمینه کشیده شود و به همین دلیل نیاز به هزینه بیشتر دارد. خانم سرابی افزود که در حال حاضر بررسی ها در این زمینه ادامه دارد.
مردم بامیان در گذشته هم در اعتراض به عملی نشدن وعده های مقامهای ارشد دولت افغانستان در زمینه بازسازی و توسعه اقتصادی این منطقه دست به اعتراضهای نمادین و جالبی زده اند.
دو سال پیش معترضان بامیانی در اعتراض به اسفالت نشدن جاده کابل-بامیان اقدام به کاهگل کردن جاده اصلی این شهر کردند و اخیرا شماری از ساکنان بامیان در یک اقدام نمادین دیگر به یک خر تقدیرنامه دادند.
ساکنان منطقه ای در بامیان در اعتراض به عدم دسترسی به آب آشامیدنی دست به این کار زدند. آنها معمولا از خر به عنوان وسیله حمل آب از رودخانه به خانه های خود از خر استفاده می کنند.
برگزاری نمایشگاه کاریکاتور در شهر بامیان هم در همین راستا، انتقاد دیگری علیه مقامهای دولت مرکزی کشور بوده است.
Source,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/persian/afghanistan/2011/05/110501_k02-bamian-electricity.shtml
مردم بامیان می گویند که این چراغ را در چهارراه اصلی این شهر نصب کرده اند تا مقامات به حال آنها توجه کنند
شماری از ساکنان ولایت بامیان در راهپیمایی به مناسبت روز جهانی کارگر نسبت به آنچه که بی توجهی دولت در زمینه تولید برق در بامیان خوانده شده، انتقاد کردهاند.
در ولایت بامیان برق دولتی وجود ندارد و مردم معمولا برای روشن کردن خانه های خود در شبها از چراغ های نفتی و انرژی برق ژنراتور (شخصی) استفاده می کنند.
این معترضان که شمار آنها به صدها تن می رسید، ضمن انتقاد از کندی روند بازسازی در این ولایت، دولت افغانستان را متهم به بی توجهی نسبت به ساختن سدی بر فراز رودخانه بامیان و تولید برق آبی در این ولایت کرده اند.
موسی شفق استاد دانشگاه بامیان و از مسئولان بنیاد توازن، که از برگزار کنندگان این راهپیمایی بوده است، به بی بی سی گفت: "هدف از اقدام امروز این بود که بخشی از وضعیت زندگی مردم بامیان به نمایش گذاشته شود و آن محروم بودن از نعمت برق در دنیای امروز و در قرن بیست و یکم است."
محمد صادق علی یار یکی دیگر از برگزارکنندگان این راهپیمایی به بی بی سی گفت که نبود انرژی برق در بامیان بر افزایش بیکاری در این ولایت نیز افزوده است. او تاکید کرد که دولت باید از امکانات موجود برای تولید انرژی برق در بامیان استفاده کند و مقدمات کار تولید برق را فراهم کند.
آقای علی یار گفت: "با توجه به ظرفیت هایی برای تولید برق در بامیان وجود دارد و آب زیادی که بامیان دارد، متاسفانه در زمینه تولید برق، که اساس زندگی صعنتی و کارهای کوچک و بزرگ است، هیچ کاری صورت نگرفته است.
در بخشی از قعطنامه ای که در پایان این راهپیمایی صادر شد، آمده است که "بامیان هنوز در تاریکی است" و این ولایت "یکسره به فراموشی سپرده شده است".
معترضان بامیان همچنین در قعطنامه خود نوشتهاند: "زندگی شهری در بامیان معاصر محروم بودن از انرژی، خزیدن به مغارهها تلقی و تفسیر میشود که سیاستمداران محافظهکار این جغرافیا و تاریخ این وضعیت را همواره به انکار گرفته است."
آنها مقامهای دولت را متهم به "تبعیض" علیه خود کرده و تاکید کرده در قعطنامه خود نوشته اند: "تبعیض ناسالم سیاسی پدیده رنج آوری است که نسبت به بامیان از سوی بعضی مقامات درجه یک این کشور روا داشته میشود. امیدواریم که این خصیصه ضدانسانی از هر کجا که ریشه دارد شناسایی و برای رفع آن اقدام گردد."
ساکنان ولایت بامیان در بخشی از راهپیمایی خود در جاده اصلی شهر بامیان، اقدام به نصب یک چراغ بزرگ نفتی در میدان نزدیک به بازار اصلی این شهر کردند و از نهادهای ولایتی درخواست کردند که این میدان به نام "اریکین" (چراغ نفتی) نامگذاری شود.
محمد صادق علی یار گفت: "ما به گونه نمادین چراغ اریکینی را در یکی از میدانهای بامیان نصب کرده ایم تا تمام کسانی که در اداره افغانستان دستی دارند، متوجه شوند که مردم هنوز هم از این چراغ استفاده می کنند."
بیشتر مردم بامیان از چراغ نفتی استفاده می کنند
حبیبه سرابی، والی بامیان در واکنش به عتراض ساکنان بامیان به بی بی سی گفت که تا حال اقدام موثری برای تولید برق در این ولایت صورت نگرفته و او به همین دلیل اعتراض مردم بامیان را "بر حق" دانست.
خانم سرابی گفت: "تظاهرات مردم را برحق می دانیم و این یک حرکت مدنی بود. واقعا در بامیان برق وجود ندارد. هنوز در این مورد اقدام موثری از طرفت دولت مرکزی صورت نگرفته است. البته اداره محلی ولایت بامیان تلاش هایی در این زمینه کرده است."
والی بامیان گفت که با توجه به نقشه فرهنگی شهر بامیان، لازم است که همه سیمکشی های شبکه برق این شهر باید از زیر زمینه کشیده شود و به همین دلیل نیاز به هزینه بیشتر دارد. خانم سرابی افزود که در حال حاضر بررسی ها در این زمینه ادامه دارد.
مردم بامیان در گذشته هم در اعتراض به عملی نشدن وعده های مقامهای ارشد دولت افغانستان در زمینه بازسازی و توسعه اقتصادی این منطقه دست به اعتراضهای نمادین و جالبی زده اند.
دو سال پیش معترضان بامیانی در اعتراض به اسفالت نشدن جاده کابل-بامیان اقدام به کاهگل کردن جاده اصلی این شهر کردند و اخیرا شماری از ساکنان بامیان در یک اقدام نمادین دیگر به یک خر تقدیرنامه دادند.
ساکنان منطقه ای در بامیان در اعتراض به عدم دسترسی به آب آشامیدنی دست به این کار زدند. آنها معمولا از خر به عنوان وسیله حمل آب از رودخانه به خانه های خود از خر استفاده می کنند.
برگزاری نمایشگاه کاریکاتور در شهر بامیان هم در همین راستا، انتقاد دیگری علیه مقامهای دولت مرکزی کشور بوده است.
Source,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/persian/afghanistan/2011/05/110501_k02-bamian-electricity.shtml
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Buddhas of Bamiyan
Ancient archaeological remains have been thrust into the cruel world of today’s seemingly endless conflicts — the ever-changing aims and alliances of international politics, religions dueling on the world stage, and the ironic trade-off of providing aid to conserve the material heritage of the past but not to preserve the lives of modern inheritors of that past. Arrayed against the tolerant and measured messages of Buddhism, the quagmire of the “Bamiyan Massacre” seems perplexing at best.
First, it is important to recognize that the massacre has little to do with religion. The Buddha is not God or even one among many gods. During his lifetime of 80 years, Buddha Sakyamuni only allowed his image to be recorded as a reflection in rippling water. Images of the Buddha himself did not appear for at least 400 years after his death and even then were created only to remind followers of their own innate “Buddha Nature.” This kind of early aversion to “idolatry” is typical of Christianity and other religions — many devotees of Christ railed against material images of Jesus for centuries, especially during two waves of “iconoclasts” (idol smashers) in the Byzantine Empire.
The colossal Buddhas were cut at immeasurable cost (probably in the third and fifth centuries A.D.) into the tall, sandstone cliffs surrounding Bamiyan, an oasis town in the center of a long valley that separates the mountain chains of Hindu Kush and Koh-i-Baba. The taller of the two statues (about 53 meters or 175 feet) is thought to represent Vairocana, the “Light Shining throughout the Universe Buddha” The shorter one (36 meters or 120 feet) probably represents Buddha Sakyamuni, although the local Hazara people believe it depicts a woman.
The two colossi must once have been a truly awesome sight, visible for miles, with copper masks for faces and copper-covered hands. Vairocana’s robes were painted red and Sakyamuni’s blue. These towering, transcendental images were key symbols in the rise of Mahayana Buddhist teachings, which emphasized the ability of everyone, not just monks, to achieve enlightenment.
While the dates of the statues are somewhat equivocal, the Buddhist monk Xuanzang, who traveled to India to bring back to China copies of the original sutras of the Buddha’s teachings, bore witness to the statues in A.D. 630-31.
For centuries, Bamiyan lay at the heart of the fabled Silk Road, offering respite to caravans carrying goods across the vast reaches between China and the Roman Empire. And for 500 years, it was a center of Buddhist cultivation. The myriad caves that pockmark Bamiyan’s cliffs were also home to thousands of Buddhist monks and served as a kind of Holiday Inn for traveling merchants, monks, and pilgrims.
Today those open, cold caves are used primarily by refugees from Afghanistan’s brutal, internal war.
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Taliban Ghazni road blockade continues
By Farzad Lameh
2011-04-25
GHAZNI – Taliban militants have blockaded a key road connecting Jaghori to Qarabagh in eastern Ghazni Province for two weeks, officials said April 24.
“The blockade has caused many problems ... but we are working to resolve it through the tribal elders as soon as possible,” Marouf Ayoobi, Ghazni provincial spokesman, told Central Asia Online.
The Taliban imposed the blockade soon after it warned travellers to stop using the road April 9.
“We would have reopened the road by now, but we are faced with a reduced number of police in the province,” Zerawar Zahid, provincial police chief, said.
Last June, the Taliban also blocked the road for several days.
2011-04-25
GHAZNI – Taliban militants have blockaded a key road connecting Jaghori to Qarabagh in eastern Ghazni Province for two weeks, officials said April 24.
“The blockade has caused many problems ... but we are working to resolve it through the tribal elders as soon as possible,” Marouf Ayoobi, Ghazni provincial spokesman, told Central Asia Online.
The Taliban imposed the blockade soon after it warned travellers to stop using the road April 9.
“We would have reopened the road by now, but we are faced with a reduced number of police in the province,” Zerawar Zahid, provincial police chief, said.
Last June, the Taliban also blocked the road for several days.
Indian Steel Companies May Unite for Bamiyan Iron Ore: Forbes India
Indian Steel Companies May Unite for Cause
Indian steel companies are pondering whether to put aside their rivalry and bid together for one of the world’s most precious iron ore reserves in Afghanistan
by Prince Mathews Thomas, Cuckoo Paul | Apr 26, 2011
For a millennium and a half until 2001, the giant Buddhas of Bamiyan in central Afghanistan were witness to much history. They overlooked the passing of the trade caravans of Europeans, Indians and Chinese along the Silk Route. Over the centuries, the Gandharas, Hunas, Ghengis Khan and even Soviet tanks had left their imprints in the vicinity. Throughout all this turbulence, the statues stood unchangingly as the symbol of Buddha’s greatest teachings — harmony and co-existence. So, when the Taliban dynamited and destroyed the Buddhas a decade ago, it appeared as if these ideals had been lost forever.
Today, the Bamiyan Valley is helping to rediscover a new future for Afghanistan. Not only is there an international effort to rebuild the Buddhas, there is also a plan taking shape to convert the Bamiyan province into a thriving industrial centre. Not far from the ruins lies a hidden treasure: The 1.8 billion tonne Hajigak iron ore mines. With a very high ferrous content of 68 percent, these are among the most coveted reserves in this part of the world and represent the best chance for rebuilding the war-torn nation.
This January, the Hamid Karzai government put the exploration rights to the mine up for an open bid. It attracted some of the biggest mining and steel firms from around the world, including Vale of Brazil and China Metallurgical Group. But the biggest interest came from Indians. Fifteen of the 22 firms that expressed an interest in tapping the mines are Indian. If all goes well at the final opening of bids in August, India hopes to use the Hajigak mines as a gateway to playing a role in Afghanistan’s transformation.
But the Indians face a dilemma. If each of the 15 firms competes on its own, the flock could be swept aside by the global giants. So, the Indian companies have done something they never did before: They have taken a leaf from Buddha’s teaching of peaceful co-existence and are exploring the possibility of bidding as a single consortium. Now, these are hardwired rivals competing for the $51 billion steel market back home. If they decide to bid together, they would be opening a whole new chapter of co-operation.
Understandably, the Indian government is delighted. It has backed the plan with a promise to fund 15 percent of the acquisition corpus. In early April, the Indian Express reported that at a high level meeting chaired by steel secretary P.K. Misra, senior officials from the ministry of external affairs said the government had the provision to dip into the Rs. 5,850 crore corpus set aside for executing developmental projects in Afghanistan. When asked, Misra downplays the development saying that no final decision has been taken. Given that some of the companies trying to get into the joint bid are state-owned, the final go-ahead will, of course, have to come from the finance ministry.
The joint bid is seen as a stepping stone to a larger objective: The creation of India’s own sovereign fund that will help home-grown companies buy expensive resources abroad and also help meet the country’s energy needs. For it is not only steel companies looking to buy mines abroad, but also power generation players hungry for coal mines. “Various concepts including a sovereign fund are there, but all are in debating stage right now. A sovereign fund will come under the MoF and it has to decide on that,” says Misra.
Bonds of steel
Three men are the centre of this initiative to bring together rivals for a greater common purpose. V. Krishnamurthy, former chairman of Steel Authority of India and now the head of the National Manufacturing Commission, C.S. Verma, the current SAIL chairman and Malay Mukherjee, CEO of Essar Steel who had earlier worked at both SAIL and ArcelorMittal. They think the urgency for the steel industry to collaborate hasn’t come a day sooner.
Indian steel companies are ravenous for iron ore to feed an economy growing at 9 percent. But “the Indian steel industry’s current plans [to secure raw material] are not working,” says Mukherjee. And without the security of getting raw material, the future plans of the Indian steel industry could be in jeopardy.
The industry veterans say that a joint bid in Afghanistan will work like a pilot project for Indian companies to co-operate in matters like global sourcing of raw materials and expanding the market for steel. “If this arrangement for the Afghanistan bid works out, it will help us expand its scope in many more ways,” says Verma.
While NMDC, India’s largest iron ore miner, will lead the Indian consortium, the partners will get the allocation of resources as per the investment they bring. It looks like the NMDC consortium will include SAIL, Tata Steel, JSW and Essar. This is pretty much most of the industry anyway.
There have been both short-term and long-term triggers for Indian steel companies to come together. We are living in an era of rising commodity prices. In just over a month, spot prices of key raw materials like iron ore and coking coal have shot up by 30 percent.
Indian firms have also struggled to buy mines across the globe. Tata Steel and JSW Steel have lost out on iron ore mines in Africa, while SAIL has struggled to match the speed and bidding power of its international peers while evaluating coal mines in Indonesia and Australia.
What’s more, as the price of raw materials has climbed, companies have been forced to move from annual long term contracts to the now quarterly, or in some cases, even monthly contracts where prices are closely linked to the volatile spot rates. This has not only increased the scramble among companies to buy mines but also pushed up the value of these mineral resources.
In India, SAIL and Tata Steel have iron ore mines, unlike others. But when it comes to coking coal, even they are not self-reliant. In the case of Tata Steel, the need is more urgent to feed its plants in Europe that it got through the Corus acquisition in 2007. None of these plants owns mines.
SAIL, despite its iron ore cushion, saw its net profit drop by 34 percent in the third quarter of 2010-11 due to high coking coal prices. “Even our next phase of expansion, which will see SAIL’s annual capacity increasing to 24 million tonnes from the present 14 million tonnes, would be unviable unless we have access to more captive mines,” says Verma.
United, We Bargain
Verma and Essar Steel’s Mukherjee have been the most vocal backers of the new initiative. Mukherjee is a former SAIL veteran who later became part of the core team of L.N. Mittal. Back in India since 2009, Mukherjee has become some sort of a champion for co-opetition. He points to international examples such as Mexico, where ArcelorMittal shares an iron ore mine with a competitor. “Resources are divided according to investment and production history,” says Mukherjee, who adds that Indian companies have already lost an opportunity in Mongolia. The central Asian country had earlier this year invited companies to develop the world’s largest untapped coking coal deposits. Consortiums from China, Russia and South Korea have made bids. There was none from India.
Verma cites another international example that could help broaden the scope of the Indian initiative. “Japanese steel mills every year jointly bargain with mining companies for annual contracts to procure raw materials. Indian companies should also come together to increase their bargaining power and thus get better rates,” says Verma. His office is now in talks with heads of other steel companies such as JSW Steel and Essar Steel who also import coking coal. Together, steel companies in India import about 40 million tonnes of coking coal a year, enough to give them bargaining power. (SAIL is also in talks with an undisclosed India private company to jointly buy a stake in Indonesian mines.)
The other area where a consortium could work is opening up new market segments within India. Take the household sector or the farming sector, for instance. It may not be viable for one firm to seed these markets as initial volumes will not justify product development and marketing costs.
Interestingly, that was a task that Indian Steel Alliance, or ISA, was supposed to do. Set up in 2001, ISA had five of the biggest Indian steelmakers as members — SAIL, Tata Steel, JSW Steel, Essar Steel and Ispat Industries. “It was set up as an industry representative at government level and also internationally. Unfortunately, differences between its members saw it shutting shop in 2008,” says D.A. Chandekar, editor and CEO of SteelWorld, an industry information and consultancy organisation.
The bone of contention, say industry executives, was setting the monthly prices of steel products. “While in the beginning the system worked, later on government pressure would force either SAIL or Tata Steel to take back the hike. Other companies were forced to follow. Differences cropped up,” says a former executive at one of the private steel companies. From 2004, when the rise of the Chinese steel industry pushed up raw material prices and made mines integral for steel business, the differences widened. “As SAIL and Tata Steel already had their own iron ore mines, other companies wanted preference in allotment of mines,” says the executive. In 2007, Tata Steel withdrew from the Alliance and SAIL followed suit a year later. ISA soon folded up.
It was a sad end to the first of its kind public-private partnership in the steel industry. Verma concedes the Afghanistan initiative to revive that idea is indeed a difficult task.
There are sceptics to the plan too. J.J. Irani, the former managing director of Tata Steel and ex-chairman of ISA told Forbes India in an email that “I do not think there is any potential” in the activity. While he declined to explain, old timers say it will take a “great level of maturity” on the behalf of the players to “leave their egos behind”. Most of these companies have locked horns over Indian mines, especially the Chiria iron ore mines in Jharkhand where SAIL has taken claim. “Also, can the decision-making mechanism of a public sector company like SAIL synchronise itself with that of a private company like Tata Steel?” asks a senior executive at one of the private steel companies. Forbes India sent emails to Tata Steel and JSW Steel asking if they are part of this new initiative. Neither of them responded.
For India, Afghanistan is a strategic priority. It enjoys immense goodwill among Afghans that the US hasn’t been able to garner even after investing $50 billion. The country has been a theater for war for too long and when the tide turns, there will be great business opportunities. For India to maximise its role in rebuilding Afghanistan, the synergy of private and public sector companies is crucial.
Source,
http://business.in.com/article/big-bet/indian-steel-companies-may-unite-for-cause/24362/3
Indian steel companies are pondering whether to put aside their rivalry and bid together for one of the world’s most precious iron ore reserves in Afghanistan
by Prince Mathews Thomas, Cuckoo Paul | Apr 26, 2011
For a millennium and a half until 2001, the giant Buddhas of Bamiyan in central Afghanistan were witness to much history. They overlooked the passing of the trade caravans of Europeans, Indians and Chinese along the Silk Route. Over the centuries, the Gandharas, Hunas, Ghengis Khan and even Soviet tanks had left their imprints in the vicinity. Throughout all this turbulence, the statues stood unchangingly as the symbol of Buddha’s greatest teachings — harmony and co-existence. So, when the Taliban dynamited and destroyed the Buddhas a decade ago, it appeared as if these ideals had been lost forever.
Today, the Bamiyan Valley is helping to rediscover a new future for Afghanistan. Not only is there an international effort to rebuild the Buddhas, there is also a plan taking shape to convert the Bamiyan province into a thriving industrial centre. Not far from the ruins lies a hidden treasure: The 1.8 billion tonne Hajigak iron ore mines. With a very high ferrous content of 68 percent, these are among the most coveted reserves in this part of the world and represent the best chance for rebuilding the war-torn nation.
This January, the Hamid Karzai government put the exploration rights to the mine up for an open bid. It attracted some of the biggest mining and steel firms from around the world, including Vale of Brazil and China Metallurgical Group. But the biggest interest came from Indians. Fifteen of the 22 firms that expressed an interest in tapping the mines are Indian. If all goes well at the final opening of bids in August, India hopes to use the Hajigak mines as a gateway to playing a role in Afghanistan’s transformation.
But the Indians face a dilemma. If each of the 15 firms competes on its own, the flock could be swept aside by the global giants. So, the Indian companies have done something they never did before: They have taken a leaf from Buddha’s teaching of peaceful co-existence and are exploring the possibility of bidding as a single consortium. Now, these are hardwired rivals competing for the $51 billion steel market back home. If they decide to bid together, they would be opening a whole new chapter of co-operation.
Understandably, the Indian government is delighted. It has backed the plan with a promise to fund 15 percent of the acquisition corpus. In early April, the Indian Express reported that at a high level meeting chaired by steel secretary P.K. Misra, senior officials from the ministry of external affairs said the government had the provision to dip into the Rs. 5,850 crore corpus set aside for executing developmental projects in Afghanistan. When asked, Misra downplays the development saying that no final decision has been taken. Given that some of the companies trying to get into the joint bid are state-owned, the final go-ahead will, of course, have to come from the finance ministry.
The joint bid is seen as a stepping stone to a larger objective: The creation of India’s own sovereign fund that will help home-grown companies buy expensive resources abroad and also help meet the country’s energy needs. For it is not only steel companies looking to buy mines abroad, but also power generation players hungry for coal mines. “Various concepts including a sovereign fund are there, but all are in debating stage right now. A sovereign fund will come under the MoF and it has to decide on that,” says Misra.
Bonds of steel
Three men are the centre of this initiative to bring together rivals for a greater common purpose. V. Krishnamurthy, former chairman of Steel Authority of India and now the head of the National Manufacturing Commission, C.S. Verma, the current SAIL chairman and Malay Mukherjee, CEO of Essar Steel who had earlier worked at both SAIL and ArcelorMittal. They think the urgency for the steel industry to collaborate hasn’t come a day sooner.
Indian steel companies are ravenous for iron ore to feed an economy growing at 9 percent. But “the Indian steel industry’s current plans [to secure raw material] are not working,” says Mukherjee. And without the security of getting raw material, the future plans of the Indian steel industry could be in jeopardy.
The industry veterans say that a joint bid in Afghanistan will work like a pilot project for Indian companies to co-operate in matters like global sourcing of raw materials and expanding the market for steel. “If this arrangement for the Afghanistan bid works out, it will help us expand its scope in many more ways,” says Verma.
While NMDC, India’s largest iron ore miner, will lead the Indian consortium, the partners will get the allocation of resources as per the investment they bring. It looks like the NMDC consortium will include SAIL, Tata Steel, JSW and Essar. This is pretty much most of the industry anyway.
There have been both short-term and long-term triggers for Indian steel companies to come together. We are living in an era of rising commodity prices. In just over a month, spot prices of key raw materials like iron ore and coking coal have shot up by 30 percent.
Indian firms have also struggled to buy mines across the globe. Tata Steel and JSW Steel have lost out on iron ore mines in Africa, while SAIL has struggled to match the speed and bidding power of its international peers while evaluating coal mines in Indonesia and Australia.
What’s more, as the price of raw materials has climbed, companies have been forced to move from annual long term contracts to the now quarterly, or in some cases, even monthly contracts where prices are closely linked to the volatile spot rates. This has not only increased the scramble among companies to buy mines but also pushed up the value of these mineral resources.
In India, SAIL and Tata Steel have iron ore mines, unlike others. But when it comes to coking coal, even they are not self-reliant. In the case of Tata Steel, the need is more urgent to feed its plants in Europe that it got through the Corus acquisition in 2007. None of these plants owns mines.
SAIL, despite its iron ore cushion, saw its net profit drop by 34 percent in the third quarter of 2010-11 due to high coking coal prices. “Even our next phase of expansion, which will see SAIL’s annual capacity increasing to 24 million tonnes from the present 14 million tonnes, would be unviable unless we have access to more captive mines,” says Verma.
United, We Bargain
Verma and Essar Steel’s Mukherjee have been the most vocal backers of the new initiative. Mukherjee is a former SAIL veteran who later became part of the core team of L.N. Mittal. Back in India since 2009, Mukherjee has become some sort of a champion for co-opetition. He points to international examples such as Mexico, where ArcelorMittal shares an iron ore mine with a competitor. “Resources are divided according to investment and production history,” says Mukherjee, who adds that Indian companies have already lost an opportunity in Mongolia. The central Asian country had earlier this year invited companies to develop the world’s largest untapped coking coal deposits. Consortiums from China, Russia and South Korea have made bids. There was none from India.
Verma cites another international example that could help broaden the scope of the Indian initiative. “Japanese steel mills every year jointly bargain with mining companies for annual contracts to procure raw materials. Indian companies should also come together to increase their bargaining power and thus get better rates,” says Verma. His office is now in talks with heads of other steel companies such as JSW Steel and Essar Steel who also import coking coal. Together, steel companies in India import about 40 million tonnes of coking coal a year, enough to give them bargaining power. (SAIL is also in talks with an undisclosed India private company to jointly buy a stake in Indonesian mines.)
The other area where a consortium could work is opening up new market segments within India. Take the household sector or the farming sector, for instance. It may not be viable for one firm to seed these markets as initial volumes will not justify product development and marketing costs.
Interestingly, that was a task that Indian Steel Alliance, or ISA, was supposed to do. Set up in 2001, ISA had five of the biggest Indian steelmakers as members — SAIL, Tata Steel, JSW Steel, Essar Steel and Ispat Industries. “It was set up as an industry representative at government level and also internationally. Unfortunately, differences between its members saw it shutting shop in 2008,” says D.A. Chandekar, editor and CEO of SteelWorld, an industry information and consultancy organisation.
The bone of contention, say industry executives, was setting the monthly prices of steel products. “While in the beginning the system worked, later on government pressure would force either SAIL or Tata Steel to take back the hike. Other companies were forced to follow. Differences cropped up,” says a former executive at one of the private steel companies. From 2004, when the rise of the Chinese steel industry pushed up raw material prices and made mines integral for steel business, the differences widened. “As SAIL and Tata Steel already had their own iron ore mines, other companies wanted preference in allotment of mines,” says the executive. In 2007, Tata Steel withdrew from the Alliance and SAIL followed suit a year later. ISA soon folded up.
It was a sad end to the first of its kind public-private partnership in the steel industry. Verma concedes the Afghanistan initiative to revive that idea is indeed a difficult task.
There are sceptics to the plan too. J.J. Irani, the former managing director of Tata Steel and ex-chairman of ISA told Forbes India in an email that “I do not think there is any potential” in the activity. While he declined to explain, old timers say it will take a “great level of maturity” on the behalf of the players to “leave their egos behind”. Most of these companies have locked horns over Indian mines, especially the Chiria iron ore mines in Jharkhand where SAIL has taken claim. “Also, can the decision-making mechanism of a public sector company like SAIL synchronise itself with that of a private company like Tata Steel?” asks a senior executive at one of the private steel companies. Forbes India sent emails to Tata Steel and JSW Steel asking if they are part of this new initiative. Neither of them responded.
For India, Afghanistan is a strategic priority. It enjoys immense goodwill among Afghans that the US hasn’t been able to garner even after investing $50 billion. The country has been a theater for war for too long and when the tide turns, there will be great business opportunities. For India to maximise its role in rebuilding Afghanistan, the synergy of private and public sector companies is crucial.
Source,
http://business.in.com/article/big-bet/indian-steel-companies-may-unite-for-cause/24362/3
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)