Tough decisions

The world is confronted with not just one but two diseases at the moment. One is caused by an obscure phantom-like virus, while the other is a brazen disregard for proper measures or a stubborn state of denial about its potential cost to human life.

Even the US is not immune. President Trump at first played down the gravity of the coronavirus outbreak and is now looking for scapegoats in China and the WHO. Our prime minister too has a lenient view about the cost of human life due to the pandemic and has resisted lockdown restrictions, advocating a gradual resumption of industrial activities to salvage the economy. And the most recent move by the federal government permitting congregational prayers at mosques has raised many eyebrows in the medical fraternity.

This is likely to be a great gamble. Even before the curve flattens in the country, giving the go-ahead for congregational prayers and for industries to begin work is dangerous. Although complete lockdowns are not a viable long-term option, resuming mass activities at this stage, when the country lacks enough testing capacity, will be premature and the ensuing health crisis is too costly a trade-off. A group of eminent doctors from Karachi at a press conference voiced concern over the federal government’s nod to re-open certain industries and to allow congregational prayers. In a damning warning, WHO Chief Dr Tedros Adhanom also cautioned that in the absence of “effective interventions”, Pakistan’s Covid-19 cases could rise to 200,000 by mid-July, and it could have a devastating impact on the economy, doubling the number of people living in poverty.

But in Pakistan, the divisive politics on the pandemic between the Centre and the Sindh government has already taken its toll, creating confusion in the public’s mind over the extent of essential safety steps against the highly infectious disease. A similar trend was seen in the US.

The Sindh government, which took the initiative to enforce social distancing in the country, is now in a quandary due to the Centre’s nigh-hostility for lockdowns. On the other hand, Imran Khan has found a potent ally in the clergy after green-lighting congregational prayers in mosques. The ulema have endorsed the prime minister’s “realistic” approach of striking a balance between lockdowns and the economy – intentionally or unintentionally wading into coronavirus politics.

Continuity of strict lockdowns seems the best bet at the moment before the country achieves sufficient testing and contact tracing capability. However, if the federal government is still adamant to go ahead with the softening of lockdowns, it should at least ensure true implementation of social distancing and the much-touted smart lockdowns. But the chances of the success of this strategy are still unproven at a pre-peak stage in the fight against the virus. Like total lockdowns, targeted lockdowns have their own limitations.

In our society, where people have no qualms with running red lights and jumping queues, calls for voluntary self-distancing have little chance of success. Anecdotally speaking, guidelines for safe distances were largely not being complied with at banks and shops that were operating during the partial lockdown in Karachi.

So it’s mind boggling to think that mosques would be able to enforce the recommended social distancing guidelines for congregational prayers. Adding to the complexity is the holy month of Ramazan, which sees a manifold increase in the number of faithful at places of worship.

There are some large mosques in Karachi which have some sort of crowd management systems in place, but every neighbourhood mosque cannot enforce conditions itself for different reasons. Social distancing measures may possibly work only if mosques have the services of law enforcement at their disposal, and some relaxation for the use of open spaces such as playgrounds for prayers. The 20-point agreement, which lays the entire burden on mosques to implement social distancing, has been agreed to with consensus between the government and religious scholars. So it can be safely speculated that if the government’s virus strategy goes awry, the ulema would serve as a perfect scapegoat.

The prime minister recently warned of a possible spike in virus cases which could reach as high as 50,000 later next month, so the logic behind hastily easing lockdowns at this stage seems beyond comprehension. The government doesn’t seem too optimistic about safety precautions to be put in place at mosques, and the prime minister himself cautioned that any breach of the agreement leading to a spike in cases would lead to the discontinuation of the agreement. But it would be too late and cumbersome as it may draw public resentment.

So to prevent losing early gains achieved through lockdowns, the fiscal space created by debt relief and record-low oil prices as well as charity can be utilised to financially support the vulnerable segments of the society. The Ehsaas cash relief programme and ration distribution efforts by the federal and provincial governments are already underway. Mosques should be given the government’s assistance to implement safety measures.

Because any coronavirus vaccine is months away, the government and people must be prepared for some level of social distancing for an extended period. Some long-term steps could include the formation of teams for ensuring compliance of government guidelines. Such teams may comprise officials of health and other relevant government departments, representatives of industrial and labour unions as well as police and Rangers personnel. The teams could be empowered to impose hefty fines and order suspension of business activities if any firm defies health safety rules.

Similarly, teams need to be formed to monitor social distancing in neighbourhoods. Local elected representatives, civil society’s members and the ulema should be part of such teams to sensitise people about the gravity of the situation. Perhaps the prime minister’s much-touted Corona Relief Tiger Force could be utilised here. Similarly, special task forces can be set up which work in coordination with these area teams to enforce social distancing guidelines. Fines on the pattern of traffic challans could be worked out to stop people from flouting social distancing restrictions. This all seems a gigantic task, but extraordinary times demand extraordinary decisions. But placing livelihood before lives would be an unwise and callous decision.

The writer is a journalist. Email: khurram.mateen@gmail.com