Thursday, November 30, 2006

Latest Sectarian Attack in Chitral

Ismaili holy site torched
Daily Times, December 1, 2006

PESHAWAR: Unknown miscreants burnt down a holy site belonging to the Ismaili community in Chitral district, which has seen sectarian violence in the past, police said on Thursday. The incident took place on November 25 when an Ismaili place of worship was reduced to ashes in Rech village, Torkhow tehsil, 170 kilometres away from Chitral city. “We are investigating the incident,” DSP Headquarters Sultan Bacha told Daily Times over the phone from Chitral. Police have not arrested anyone yet and Bacha declined to say whether the incident was linked to past sectarian violence. Prince Karim Aga Khan, the spiritual leader of the Ismaili sect, has spent billions of rupees on community development projects across the district and continues to invest in the development of the area. staff report

The Debate in Boston about Two Pakistani Imams

Arrests of local imams divides community on law enforcement
Dueling petitions spark debate over immigration
By Kristin Erekson :Jewish Advocate - Thursday November 30 2006

Two Bostonians expanded the debate on immigration rights to the Web last week as they created an online petition in support of the recent arrests of local Muslim leaders.

Imams Hafiz Muhammed Masood of the Islamic Center of New England in Sharon and Hafiz Abdul Hannan of the Islamic Society of Greater Lowell in Chelmsford, along with Masood’s 24-year-old son, Hassan, were released on bail from the Plymouth County House of Correction last Tuesday.

The Pakistan natives were among 33 individuals taken into custody around the country as part of an ongoing investigation into a visa fraud scheme. The plan allegedly helped large numbers of illegal aliens fraudulently obtain religious worker visas to enter or remain in the states, according to a statement released by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Local bloggers “Miss Kelly,” who asked to be identified only by her online moniker, and Martin “Sol” Solomon, teamed up to write a petition that applauds ICE’s efforts. The document, which had 145 signatures as of press time, was produced after the Boston chapter of the Muslim American Society crafted its own petition last Thursday in support of Masood and Hannan. If the number of signatures breaks the 1,000 mark, “Miss Kelly” and Solomon plan on sending their paperwork to the ICE and other state officials, including Gov. Mitt Romney and Mayor Thomas M. Menino.

“People talk about the need for immigration laws to be enforced, but when [these officials] try to enforce them, they get in a lot of trouble,” said Solomon, who is well known for his political blog, Solomonia.com. “We are not anti-Muslim, but we are supportive of the authorities.”

“Miss Kelly’s” Web site focuses on issues surrounding Christianity and the rise in Islamic fundamentalism, while Solomon’s blog closely monitors local and national anti-Israel actions.

Boston political humorist and WTTK 96.9 FM radio host Michael Graham said he signed the petition for pro-immigration laws because he is “an outspoken critic of illegal immigration.” Graham invited “Miss Kelly” to his Monday show to discuss the arrest of the imams.

“The law is being enforced, and it’s nonsensical to say that because of someone’s religion they are above the law,” Graham added. “If America’s immigrations officers aren’t going to enforce laws in this case, when are they?”

An area Muslim, who is a member of the Islamic Centers of New England, contacted “Miss Kelly” earlier this week, saying that many Muslims – including himself – wanted to sign the pro-immigration law petition but were afraid to.
“I thought, ‘Oh my god, this is crazy,’” “Miss Kelly” said. “People are coming here illegally and circumventing the system. Who cares how nice they are? Why should they get blanket support?”

Yet Barry D. Hoffman, Consulate General of Pakistan in Boston for New England, said these bloggers are just adding to the “tremendous amount of hysteria” against Muslims.

“If people are so interested in upholding immigration laws, then why don’t they arrest the ... Brazilians in Framingham,” Hoffman asked. “As far as these bloggers go, where do they think their grandparents came from?”
The seizure of the imams also sent ripples of shock throughout the local religious community, especially since the men come from prestigious backgrounds. For instance, 48-year-old Masood’s résumé on the Islamic Center of New England’s Web site states that he has advanced degrees from Boston University and Islamic University in Faisalabad, Pakistan.

But MAS has been working hard to boost Masood and Hannan’s images by arranging rallies and encouraging individuals to fast and pray for their support. MAS also formed a petition that garnered more than 1,400 signatures and was passed on to Judge Paul Gagnon during the bail hearing last Tuesday, according to Bilal Kaleem, associate director of the Boston chapter of the MAS. The imams were released on $7,500 bail, and Hassan was given $2,500 bail.

“We wanted to show the judge that there is a deep well of support in the community for these two imams,” Kaleem said. “We wanted to highlight the work they’ve done and what they stand for.”

In the next couple of months, Masood, Hannan and Hassan will likely attend a pre-trial hearing before an immigration judge to determine what relief may be available, according to the Masood’s attorney, William Joyce of the Boston law firm Joyce and Associates.

Rabbi Barry Starr of Temple Israel in Sharon said that while the facts of the case have not been revealed to him, he does view the trio as “kind, compassionate and outgoing” religious leaders.

Also See Muslims Embraced their Freed Leader in Boston Globe by clicking here

Wednesday, November 29, 2006

Muslims in America - All's well that ends well?

Lawyer wrongly arrested in bombings: 'We lived in 1984'
CNN: November 29, 2006

PORTLAND, Oregon (CNN) -- The U.S. Justice Department said Wednesday it is paying $2 million and apologizing to an Oregon lawyer wrongly accused of being involved with the 2004 train bombings in Madrid, Spain.

Brandon Mayfield was arrested in Portland on a material witness warrant in May 2004, less than two months after the bombings.

According to an FBI affidavit at the time, his fingerprint was identified as being on a blue plastic bag containing detonators found in a van used by the bombers.

The FBI's fingerprint identification was wrong, however, and Mayfield was released several days later.

The bombings of four commuter trains March 11, 2004, killed 191 people and wounded more than 1,800.

Mayfield charged he was a victim of profiling because the Portland-area attorney was a Muslim convert.

He and his family later sued the U.S. government for damages.

"We lived in 1984," Mayfield told reporters Wednesday. "I'm talking about the George Orwell, frightening brave new world in which Big Brother is constantly watching you."

"I, myself, have dark memories of stifling paranoia, of being monitored, followed, watched, tracked," he said, choking back emotion.

"I've been surveilled, followed, targeted primarily because I've been an outspoken critic of this administration and doing my job to defend others who can't defend themselves, to give them their day in court, and mostly for being a Muslim."

The government refused, he said, to tell him where they put their cameras and surveillance devices, leaving his family wondering if their private conversations and intimate moments were on display.

"The days and weeks and months following my arrest were some of the hardest and darkest that myself and my family have ever had to endure," he said.

"And all because of this government's ill-conceived war on terror. ... What I really want is for this not to happen to anyone else."

Wednesday's settlement includes not only a $2 million payment and an apology, but also an agreement by the government to destroy communications intercepts conducted by the FBI against Mayfield's home and office during the investigation.

The written apology reads:

"The United States of America apologizes to Mr. Brandon Mayfield and his family for the suffering caused by the FBI's misidentification of Mr. Mayfield's fingerprint and the resulting investigation of Mr. Mayfield, including his arrest as a material witness in connection with the 2004 Madrid train bombings and the execution of search warrants and other court orders in the Mayfield family home and in Mr. Mayfield's law office."

A Justice Department statement released Wednesday said Mayfield was not targeted because of his Muslim faith and that the FBI had taken steps to improve its fingerprint identification process "to ensure that what happened to Mr. Mayfield does not happen again."

"Mr. Mayfield and his family felt it was in their best interest to get on with their lives," said Mayfield's attorney, Elden Rosenthal.

"No amount of money can compensate Mr. Mayfield for being held as a prisoner and being told he faced the death penalty [for the Madrid bombings]."

Mayfield said his suit was not about money.

"It's about regaining our civil rights, our freedom and most important, our privacy," he said.

He and his attorneys said the settlement will allow him to continue the portion of his lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Patriot Act.

Mayfield contends that his home was searched under provisions of the Patriot Act.

Pakistani Journalists in the Line of Fire

Journalists err, militants punish
By Iqbal Khattak
Daily Times, November 29, 2006

PESHAWAR: “Let me chop off his head who has reported that I have surrendered to the army,” late Taliban commander Nek Muhammad said a day after his April 24, 2004, deal with the army that was dubbed a “capitulation” by the media.

The remarks frightened a group of journalists, among them this correspondent, who were interviewing Nek Muhammad in the Kaloosha area of South Waziristan a day after the Shakai deal, which collapsed on foreign terrorists’ issue within months. The journalists looked at each other with pale faces after hearing from Nek Muhammad that their necks depended on their reporting from Waziristan.

On our way back to Wana after meeting Nek Muhammad, my BBC colleague and I were laughing to recover from the unbelievable moments since we did not know how our organisations interpreted the deal. People in Peshawar, Islamabad, Lahore or Karachi may not realise it, but it is very difficult for journalists to work in conflict zones like Waziristan. A single word in a story is enough to invite serious trouble from militants. The mood of militants about journalists can change as quickly as the weather in Britain, and Nek Muhammad was behaving like a good boy when all of a sudden he looked a different man after his comrade told him that newspaper headlines said that he had “surrendered” to the army.

And what happened on Tuesday in Miranshah, North Waziristan, underlines the danger the journalists are facing. A technical mistake or someone else’s blunder can cause physical harm to the people on the ground reporting from one of the most dangerous places in the world.

“I cannot believe what happened to me,” senior journalist Haji Pazir said a day after the militants, known locally as Taliban, stormed his office, burned all newspapers, took away his 22-year-old son and banned the sale of newspapers in the entire North Waziristan.

Pazir will thank God for saving him, as a journalist described it as “sheer good luck” that the militants did not harm him.

“I had terrible moments explaining to militants that it was not my mistake and I cannot be made a scapegoat for someone else’s mistake. I thank God because the militants believed that I was telling the truth,” Pazir said.

The saying, “To err is human”, appears to be absent from the militants’ dictionary.

Reporters Without Borders (RSF), an international media rights group, said in its reaction to the events in North Waziristan on Tuesday: “The Taliban reaction to an erroneous news report was out of all proportion.”

“Caught in the crossfire between jihadis, the security forces and tribal chiefs, journalists work in extremely difficult conditions in the tribal areas,” RSF says. “These incidents, combined with the detention of two Pakistani journalists by the Taliban (in Afghanistan), highlight the dangers for reporters in this region.”

If journalists cave in to the militants’ pressure, the government may try them for treason for “glorifying” militants. In either case, the danger from both sides is similar. Three journalists have been killed while covering Waziristan and the situation is not improving.

Inside Chitral



Pakistan's Chitral District: A Refuge for al-Qaeda's Top Leadership?
By Hassan Abbas
Terrorism Focus - Jamestown Foundation
Volume 3, Issue 46 (November 28, 2006)

In the hunt for Osama bin Laden and other top al-Qaeda leaders, security services continue to focus on Pakistan's Chitral district in the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP). Chitral became a concern after the release of a bin Laden videotape from September 2003 in which trees native to the Chitrali mountain range were evident. Extensive search operations for the al-Qaeda leader and fellow operatives by Pakistani and U.S. forces were conducted in the area in February-March 2003 (Dawn, March 7, 2003). More recently, in May there were claims that the Federal Bureau of Investigation had established an office in Chitral to monitor militant activities in the district (The Nation, May 1). Other links to the district include Abu Khabaib, an Arab explosives expert who has been spotted several times in the hills of Chitral. He is known to have helped Sheikh Ahmed Saleem, an Arab member of al-Qaeda. Saleem has been giving money to Lashkar-e-Jhangvi for recruiting militants for al-Qaeda in Pakistan (Daily Times, October 2). Finally, because Chitral is adjacent to Afghanistan's Nuristan province, there is concern that Taliban and al-Qaeda militants are crossing the border between the two countries.

Chitral, with its rich cultural heritage and changing religio-political trends, is a fascinating area in the NWFP. It is caught between diverse traditions and rumors of al-Qaeda involvement. In the backdrop of the turmoil created by pro-Taliban elements in the Pakistan-Afghanistan border area and the rising influence of religious political parties in the district, Chitral has become an important focus in the war on terrorism. For centuries, the people of Chitral have lived in relative isolation in their mountain kingdom. They have experienced various political phases, beginning with their involuntary association with the British Empire (1895), their voluntary association with the new state of Pakistan (1947) and finally their incorporation into Pakistan's NWFP (1969). The Katur dynasty that ruled the area collapsed in 1949-50, and the federal government of Pakistan took direct control of the Chitral administration.

Geographically, Chitral is bordered by Afghanistan in the north, south and west. A narrow strip of Afghan territory, the Wakhan strip, separates it from Tajikistan. It has always been a very important route for invaders on their way to South Asia, including Alexander the Great and the Mongols. The Chitral Valley, at an elevation of 1,100 meters, is popular with mountaineers, hunters, hikers and Western anthropologists. Imposing mountains dominate the landscape of Chitral, forging a rugged terrain that is home to approximately 325,000 people comprising an area of 243,818 acres. The topography of the district is varied, with 30% of the region covered in glaciers, snow-clad mountains, bare rock and barren ground, and with about 65% of the land supporting pastures with only sparse vegetation. Chitral is cut off from the rest of Pakistan during the winter. Sunnis compose 65% of Chitral, while Ismaili Shiites comprise 35% of the population. A small population of the non-Muslim Kailash community—known for their beautiful dresses and traditional dance—are based in the south of the district.

While located in a Pashtun region, the Chitrali people are ethnically different than Pashtuns. They are called Kho and their primary language is Khowar, although about 10 other languages are spoken in the area. One might expect that Pashto would be a natural choice as a second language for many Chitralis, but that is not the case. In fact, Chitralis dislike Pashtuns and their language. Their dislike is in part an outcome of economic factors—for instance, since 1979-80, a large number of Afghan refugees (predominantly Pashtuns) moved into the area and competed quite successfully with the local Chitrali businessmen. Business in the region is predominately agricultural.

Chitralis have a reputation for being civilized and peace-loving. Their folk singers are popular in various parts of Pakistan. There is a fairly sizeable seasonal migration of Chitrali men to Peshawar and to other cities of Pakistan for winter employment. Additionally, many have found employment in the Gulf States. Relations between Sunnis and Shiite Ismailis have been cordial historically, but have recently become more heated now that Wahhabis have more influence in the area.

In terms of political orientation, however, Chitral has been steadily becoming more conservative. For instance, its current representative in the National Assembly of Pakistan, Maulana Abdul Akbar Chitrali, belongs to Jamaat-e-Islami (part of the religious MMA alliance) and is a chief administrator of a seminary in Peshawar named Jamia Arabia Hadiqatul Uloom. Interestingly, he is best known for leading a mob that burned down the offices of the Frontier Post newspaper in Peshawar three years ago after it published a "Letter to the Editor" with controversial religious connotations.

More troubling signs emerged in late 2004 when the offices of a progressive Pakistani NGO, Aga Khan Rural Support Program (AKRSP), sponsored by Ismaili leader Prince Karim Aga Khan, were attacked by religious extremists. Developments came to a head on December 27, 2004 when two workers of the Aga Khan Health Services Office in Chitral were killed in a terrorist attack and four vehicles owned by the charity organization were destroyed. The culprits turned out to be two men associated with the declared terrorist group Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, which has links to al-Qaeda (Dawn, January 5, 2005). In a December 29, 2004 Daily Times editorial titled "Chitral Trouble is Symptomatic of Deeper Malaise," the paper maintained that this development was an outcome of sectarianism and that "in Chitral, the Shiite-Sunni tension dates back to 1988 when the Northern Areas were attacked by Pashtun lashkars."

In conclusion, due to Chitral's location on the border with Afghanistan, elements of al-Qaeda may find refuge there. The mountains potentially provide a good cover. Yet, another potent factor has to be kept in perspective—because much of the district's population is not friendly to Pashtuns, they may be less willing than other areas of the NWFP to provide sanctuary. Pashtunwali has very limited appeal in this area and Ismaili Shiites (35% of the population) are anti-al-Qaeda to their core for sectarian reasons. Therefore, one can speculate that the al-Qaeda leadership may have passed through this area during their "travels" in the region, but are unlikely to consider Chitral a place where they can find safe refuge for a long period of time.

Pakistan growth creates wealth gap: BBC

Pakistan growth creates wealth gap
By Paul Moss
BBC News, The World Tonight : November 28, 2006

Salman has a way with words. He also has a snappy dress sense, and a keen knowledge of the communications industry. He should be going places.
In fact, Salman was going places, a rising success at the firm where he's been working in Karachi for the past two years.

That was until they brought the new guy in.

"He didn't know anything about the industry," Salman explains.

"But he comes from an important Pakistani family, one with land, power. Our aristocracy.

"The family made a call to my firm, told them to hire this guy, and that was that."

Salman says that since the new arrival was put in charge of his department, morale and output have both plummeted.

And he has particular reason to be bitter.

He is one of a growing number of Pakistanis who have lived abroad, but decided to come back to work in their homeland, and try to make their mark on its newly-growing economy.

"With this kind of practice going on," he says, "I don't think this country will ever progress."

Big spenders

That is a damning verdict on what, statistically at least, seems to be an extraordinary boom in Pakistan.


It doesn't matter if you are complying with every regulation, they are after bribes
Zobair

The world may have focused on the political ups and downs of the country's President, Pervez Musharraf.

But since the General took power in a coup seven years ago, his most radical actions have been on the economic front.

The country has swallowed the usual World Bank-recommended diet of privatisation, liberalisation and opening up of markets.

But what makes Pakistan stand out is the speed it has done this, and the extent of the change.

Growth has soared, foreign debt has been cut, and the nation's consumers have gone on one of history's greatest shopping sprees, splashing out in record numbers on anything from fridges and flats, to luxury cars.

Bribes are rife

The World Bank has given the programme a big thumb's up, and foreign investors show signs of renewed interest.


But as any economist in the country will tell you, this kind of growth can only continue if people are convinced that the old Pakistan ways of doing business - with corruption, bureaucracy, and an alarming level of regulation - is on the way out for good.

Factory worker Zobair is not convinced.

He acknowledges that things are improving.

Operations at his textile factory, he says, have recently been freer than ever from government interference.

Yet still it comes.

"Eighteen official inspectors visit every year," he says.

"It doesn't matter if you are complying with every regulation, they are after bribes.

"Things are getting better, but the pace of change needs to be increased."

Remaining poverty

Kaiser Bengali is concerned. A Professor of economics at Szabist University, he took me to a village just 10 miles from Karachi City Centre, to show me the people who he says have gained nothing from all the reforms.

The village stank.

Filthy rubbish was piled up everywhere, there was no proper sewerage system, and, as locals explained, health care was grossly inadequate.

Many have no source of employment.

Pakistan's Government insists the poor have also gained under the new economic regime, but Professor Bengali does not buy it.

Instead, he says, there has been an alarming growth in inequality.

"Try to imagine," he says, "a man who sees the expensive cars in the street, but comes home unable to feed his children, because he can't find work. He is angry.

"Or an educated man who cannot support his own parents. He becomes ashamed of himself."

Angry responses

And Professor Bengali has a warning.

"Anger may lead people into crime, or self harm. Suicide rates are going up," he says.

"But people also turn to religious radicalism. We see this in Pakistan every day."

Even the World Bank acknowledges that the perception of rising inequality may become a problem in Pakistan, and it is launching various programmes to mitigate the worst aspects of social deprivation.

But there is a special urgency to this task.

Pakistan is the venue for an escalating conflict between the State, and local militants with ties to Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

Only this month, a suicide bomber killed more than 40 soldiers at an army base, retaliation for the bombing of a madrassah, which left more than 80 dead.

It is possible that the World Bank and other development programmes will alleviate the poverty and desperation that make people easy recruiting targets for militants.

But it takes far longer to build a new water supply system, or a new village health centre, than it does to spread an angry message, or the tools to make a bomb.

The World Tonight is running a series of reports by Paul Moss on Pakistan - from Wednesday, 29 November, at 2200 UK time

Politics, not religion, at the heart of growing Muslim-West divide

UNITED NATIONS: Alliance of civilizations
PRESS RELEASE


Politics, not religion, at the heart of growing Muslim-West divide, new report argues

(ISTANBUL, TURKEY 13 November) The key reasons for the growing divide
between Muslim and Western societies are not religious, but political, concludes a report presented to Secretary-General Kofi Annan today in Istanbul.

On receiving the report, the Secretary-General said: "We need to get away from stereotypes, generalizations and preconceptions, and take care not to let crimes committed by individuals or small groups dictate our image of an entire people, an entire region, or an entire religion.

"We should start by reaffirming -- and demonstrating -- that the problem is not the Koran, nor the Torah or the Bible. Indeed, I have often said the problem is never the faith - it is the faithful, and how they behave towards each other."

In its report, the High-level Group of the Alliance of Civilizations maintains that although religion is often cynically exploited to stir passions, fuel suspicions and support alarmist claims that the world is facing a new "war of religion", the root of the matter is political.

Furthermore, the Arab-Israeli conflict has become a critical symbol of the deepening rift. Along with Western military interventions in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan the Group argues, this conflict contributes significantly to the growing sense of resentment and mistrust that mars relations among communities. The report also suggests that the repression of non-violent political opposition and the slow pace of reforms in some Muslim countries is a key factor in the rise of extremism.

The Co-chairs of the Group presented the report to the Secretary-General as well as to the Prime Ministers of Spain and Turkey, as co-sponsoring governments of the Alliance initiative.

In his address, the Turkish Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdoðan, said: "At a time when the increasing polarization between major cultures and belief systems throughout the world urgently needs to be addressed, the presentation of this Report and its recommendations to the international community constitutes a hopeful and exciting step in efforts to sow the seeds of respect and understanding."

The High-level Group -- a panel of 20 world renowned experts (see full list below) -- was appointed by Secretary-General Annan a year ago to explore ways of addressing the increasing polarization between Muslim and Western societies.

Speaking at the event, the Spanish Prime Minister, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, said: "We cannot stand idle in the face of claims that a clash of cultures and civilizations is inevitable. In our efforts to counter them [...] we can count on international law, on the UN, on human rights, and, above all, we can count on the equal dignity of all men and women and on our unique capacity for dialogue and conflict resolution. From now on, we will also count on the Alliance of Civilizations."

In order to address the issues outlined in their report, members of the High-level Group offer a number of practical solutions, including:

· A High Representative to assist the Secretary-General in defusing crises that arise at the intersection of religion and politics and to oversee the implementation of the Report's recommendations.

· A White Paper analyzing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict dispassionately and objectively, giving voice to the competing narratives on both sides, reviewing and diagnosing the successes and failures of past peace initiatives, and establishing clearly the conditions that must be met to find a way out of this crisis. In addition, the High-level Group called for the resumption of the political process, including the convening of an international conference on the Middle East Peace Process
as soon as possible.

· A regional Middle East conference to be convened as soon as possible and involving all the relevant actors with aim of reinvigorating the peace process.

· Support for the expansion of political pluralism in Muslim countries. The High-level Group calls on ruling parties in the Muslim world to provide the space for the full participation of non-violent political parties, whether religious or secular in nature and calls on foreign governments to be consistent in their support for pluralism by, for example, respecting the outcome of elections.

The Report puts forward a range of concrete proposals in the areas of education, media, youth and migration to build bridges and promote a culture of respect and understanding among Western and Muslim communities, including:

The development of film and television programs co-produced across religious and cultural boundaries and showing diversity as a normal feature of society.
The establishment of a "Risk Fund" to offset the market forces that encourage mostly sensationalistic and stereotypical cultural representations.
The creation of a Global Youth Solidarity Fund, to encourage young people to contribute to the implementation of all of the recommendations set forth in this report. The promotion of cross-cultural and human rights education to ensure that
students everywhere develop an understanding of other cultures and religions.

Further recommendations are included in the attached ?Highlights of the Report?.

The report comes at the end of a year-long process in which the Group had three main meetings -- in Palma de Mallorca, Spain, Doha, Qatar and Dakar, Senegal -- as well as a working session in New York. Their work was supported by extensive analysis and research conducted and commissioned by the Alliance of Civilizations Secretariat in New York as well as through consultations with a wide range of multilateral agencies and international organizations.

For more information about the Alliance of Civilizations, to download a copy of the report and to see interviews with High-level Group members, click here

Monday, November 27, 2006

Armitage in the News again: Not for threatening Pakistan!

Afghanistan may destabilise Pakistan, India: Armitage
Daily Times, November 28, 2006

SINGAPORE: Failure to restore peace to Afghanistan may jeopardise stability in neighbouring Pakistan and have a knock-on effect on India, said former US deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage on Monday.

Calling on the international community to pay more attention to Afghanistan, Armitage said persistent violence in that country might wreck Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf’s efforts to defeat forces of religious extremism at home.

“I want to call your attention to Afghanistan. The stakes in Afghanistan are actually larger in the near term than they are in Iraq,” said Armitage at a seminar for conflict mediators in Asia.

Continued clashes in Afghanistan could also have knock-on effects on India, which may already perceive itself to be surrounded by failed or failing states such as Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, he said.

Afghanistan is currently enduring its bloodiest period since US-led coalition forces overthrew the Taliban’s radical Islamic government in 2001, with insurgent attacks gathering momentum.

“The knock-on effects of a lack of success in Afghanistan will have enormous repercussions,” said Armitage.

He called NATO’s current role in Afghanistan “an excellent model” of an international peacekeeping solution.

Armitage said he expected further US military policy decisions would involve much more consultation and oversight now that Democrats had won control of Congress in the mid-term elections.

“I personally believe that we need some time to reconstitute our army and our Marine Corps,” he said.

The situation in Afghanistan was not “an Iran situation which is a future problem, but a problem now”, he added. agencies

Bajaur Bombing?

US carried out madrasah bombing
The Sunday Times November 26, 2006

THE bombing of a Pakistani madrasah last month, in which 82 students were killed, was carried out by the United States, a Pakistani official has admitted, writes Christina Lamb.

The madrasah in the tribal agency of Bajaur was bombed during a visit to Pakistan by the Prince of Wales amid allegations that it was being used to train suicide bombers.

“We thought it would be less damaging if we said we did it rather than the US,” said a key aide to President Pervez Musharraf. “But there was a lot of collateral damage and we’ve requested the Americans not to do it again.”

The Americans are believed to have attacked after a tip-off that Ayman al-Zawahiri, the deputy leader of Al-Qaeda, was present. Local people claimed the victims included boys as young as 12 and that the tribal area had been negotiating with the Pakistan government for a peace deal.

Pakistani officials insist they were shown satellite images of people training and have checked the identity cards of all those killed, and that all were adults.

Changing Realities of Asia

VIEW: The Asian age —Dr Ayesha Siddiqa
Daily Times, November 27, 2006

In India, Hu spoke about Beijing’s desire to befriend India and find an amicable solution to resolve their bilateral disputes. Hu also offered India bilateral cooperation in the field of civil nuclear energy, which is a major step in reducing the overall tension between the two countries

It is after ages that Islamabad was decorated with such fervor to receive a foreign dignitary. The main roads were lit up at night and the garbage cleaned, all to welcome the Chinese President, Hu Jintao. The gracious welcome signified the importance of China’s friendship for Pakistan.

Islamabad’s relationship with Beijing has remained reasonably steady since the early 1960s, especially in terms of the supply of conventional and non-conventional military technology. In the past seven years, Islamabad has also generously welcomed Chinese investment in Pakistan and made room for Chinese companies to exploit Pakistan’s real estate, agricultural, industrial and other resources. The guarantees given to the Chinese government and companies — for investing in underdeveloped areas such as Gwadar, and in the agricultural and corporate sectors — have often come at the cost of leaving the local entrepreneurs and the landless peasants vulnerable. Neither sector is happy with Chinese goods being dumped in Pakistan’s markets or with the concept of corporate farming.

Islamabad has resisted local pressure because it feels that it has to provide a market to keep China attracted to Pakistan. Since money makes the mare go, Beijing would not ignore a potential market for its goods and services. Economic progress is a top priority for Beijing, especially after the fundamental change in its policy in 1979. Pakistan and China are also significant partners in the defence sector and the Pakistani military has been a major recipient of Chinese weapons and production technology.

Even during President Hu’s visit to Pakistan, both countries have signed various agreements to boost trade and to carry out joint development and production of weapon systems. An additional benefit to China of partnering Pakistan in the defence sector is that Islamabad has generously shared its technical experience and know-how to help China improve its weapons designs. The JF-17 Thunder project, which was gradually built on the old F-7 aircraft design, is one of the many examples of cooperation between the two.

However, President Hu’s visit is significant in more than what it puts on Pakistan’s table. This is a trip which essentially defines the new parameters of Asian geo-politics. This new paradigm allows the two giants of Asia, India and China, to re-structure their relations and base it on mutual economic considerations. The underlying motivation is to allow economic realities to determine the course of geo-politics rather than the other way around. This is fundamentally different from the historical US-USSR Cold War framework in which political-ideological orientation determined economic and social realities.

Prior to his visit to Pakistan, Hu was in India and spoke about Beijing’s desire to befriend New Delhi and find amicable means to resolve their bilateral disputes. Hu also offered India bilateral cooperation in the field of civil nuclear energy, which is a major step in reducing the overall tension between the two countries. For China the over-riding reality is economics. Since New Delhi is planning to embark upon an ambitious plan to develop its civil nuclear sector through building a large number of reactors, this creates a market too important for China to ignore.

There are other mutual benefits as well, such as the possibility of a South-South transfer of technology in the future and fewer problems for India in getting approval from the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) once the case of India-US civil-nuclear agreement is put on the table. Since China cannot endlessly delay the India-US nuclear deal, it makes sense for it to benefit politically by reducing the tension between itself and India. The Chinese offer would certainly take the wind out of the idea that by offering technology to New Delhi, Washington would be able to build India as a strategic partner against China. The relations can be redefined in China’s favour. If the relations between the two bigger Asian neighbours improve, there is always the possibility of Beijing benefiting from India’s technological prowess in constructing larger civilian nuclear reactors.

In offering India cooperation in the nuclear field, Beijing seems to have recognised future developments in the region. A number of Western countries including the US and European states are seeking out India as a potential hub of technological and economic development. Partnering with India is considered beneficial for national economies. For Instance, the nuclear cooperation between India and the US would not only strengthen India technologically, but will also provide a market for the almost dead civil nuclear industry in the US which has not constructed new reactors in years. China, of course, sees itself benefiting from the windfall of India’s development. Besides the nuclear programme, Chinese companies are also competing for contracts for developing numerous new seaports in India.

A possible cooperation between India and China will also change the dynamics of Asian politics, or even global politics. While the two Asian neighbours will compete with each other in claiming their share of politico-military prowess in Asia, there will be lesser chances of conflict. Perhaps, war will become redundant but not necessarily military and economic competition.

The development in India-China relations does not make Pakistan insignificant. In fact, the Hu Jintao’s visit to Pakistan and a commitment to increase trade and sign other agreements is an indicator that Beijing wants to have Islamabad on board in terms of re-defining Asian geo-politics. But what Islamabad is expected to do is to reassess its priorities and its lager geo-political game plan. Pakistan will have to re-prioritise its strategic road map and look at bilateral relations with its bigger neighbours and its internal policies in terms of the economic dividends which lie in store for it. It will, perhaps, also have to abandon its obsession with equality with other bigger and more significant regional states. Indubitably, Pakistan is equal in terms of its sovereignty, but this particular term must not be confused with military, political and economic parity, which is a totally different ballgame.

Although, President Hu said he was committed to playing a ‘constructive’ role in negotiating peace between India and Pakistan, there are no signs that Beijing has the clout or will have the influence on New Delhi, even in the future, to help the two South Asian neighbours discuss a territorial solution of Kashmir. Also, in case of growing economic cooperation between Beijing and New Delhi, China will be less inclined to take on India on the issue of Kashmir. Greater economic cooperation between India and China will actually mean that Beijing will not be willing to push New Delhi on issues which hamper their bilateral economic equation. After all, both countries have also agreed to increase their bilateral trade and China will be India’s biggest trade partner after the US.

Asian politics at large is being re-structured. One of the manifestations of easing of tension and improvement of relations between India and China is likely to create a centre of political gravity in Asia which will improve the significance of this region in global politics. This political centre will gain greater strength once Russia also swings back into better economic and political shape.

Surely, the changing geo-political contours have a space for Pakistan as a medium-sized military power which would benefit from the situation even more if it were to develop economically and put its house in order in terms of re-aligning its geo-political priorities. The policy regarding militants and militancy would certainly have to be re-assessed if Islamabad intends to get on board the Asian bandwagon.

The author is an Islamabad-based independent defence analyst. She is also an author of a book on Pakistan’s arms procurement decision-making, and on the military’s economic interests

Saturday, November 25, 2006

Tariq Ramadan on Islam and the West


Watch Tariq Ramadan talking about Islam and the West: click here

For views of Tariq Ramadan, visit his website: Click here

Cutting the holy fathers down to size: how?

Yesterday’s battles
By Ayaz Amir: Dawn, November 24, 2006

WAS there no Islam before the Hudood Ordinance, 1979? Will there be no Islam after this iniquitous law is amended? What storm of absolute nonsense are the mullahs trying to whip up?

Not that they are succeeding but that’s beside the point. We have other problems that need attending to. But trust our talent for irrelevance to raise a tempest over non-issues.

Some of our more imaginative clerics have warned that the Women Protection Bill (which amends the Hudood law) will lead to sexual anarchy. Funny and not a little titillating. Sexual anarchy in God’s own republic? Ghalib comes to mind: “Keh khushi say mar na jatay gar aitbar hota...” (Wouldn’t we die of joy were we to believe this.)

To see the way we go on about things relating to women, it would seem that women are our biggest problem, bigger than democracy, bigger than anything else. The more we have segregated and separated them, the more they seem to ride our imagination. Nature’s revenge, if you look at the matter judiciously. An attractive woman walks through a bazaar and even though she be veiled and dressed in a burqa, most men will be trying to x-ray her through their eyes, mesmerised by her ankles and hands if nothing else is visible.

We must be the foremost country on earth as far as staring at women is concerned. Foreigners coming to Pakistan notice this immediately. It could be flattering in the beginning but surely a bit trying after some time.

The periodic fuss in India, among Indian Muslims to be precise, over tennis star Sania Mirza’s on-court apparel is scarcely surprising. It is typical of the attitude of the subcontinental Muslim male to the grave threat posed to his equanimity by the attractive female. And Sania Mirza, as we all agree, is very attractive, besides being good at tennis, making her the best thing to have happened to subcontinental sport for a long time.

We are great hypocrites when it comes to these matters — I’m afraid I can’t be more explicit — but the prize, as far as hypocrisy is concerned, goes to our holy fathers. The general perception about them is that between their precepts and their practice the distance is great.

We have always known this and our best poetry — whether Ghalib’s, Iqbal’s, Bulleh Shah’s or Ghulam Farid’s — treats the mullah with scant respect if not, quite often, with outright mockery. Strange therefore that because of General Ziaul Haq and his attempts to mullah-ise the country, the clergy in Pakistan has become the political nuisance that it is.

I come from a typical north Punjab village and I know that in our social set-up mullahs were always tolerated — because they had to officiate at ceremonies of birth, death and marriage — but never considered of any social importance, as they still are not.

In politics they had no voice. In village disputes their opinion was neither sought nor considered and, mercifully, still isn’t. It might be different in the Frontier province which is more conservative but not in rural Punjab. The alliance of the holy fathers, the Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal, has come to power in the Frontier (with no little help from our military godfathers). That the Pakhtoons may be regretting their choice is a different matter. Not in a hundred years can the MMA come to power in Punjab.

Gen Ayub Khan (1958-69) had no time for the holy fathers, one of the few good things in his repertoire of folly and shortsightedness. But when after his departure conflict erupted in East Pakistan — the Awami League sweeping to an historic victory and the army resolved not to accept it — an alliance, born out of mutual necessity, was forged between the army and armed militias (Al-Shams, Al-Badr) allied to the Jamaat-i-Islami.

Both were on the same wavelength, the army convinced it was performing its patriotic duty, and the Jamaat that it was doing God’s work, in quelling the popular upsurge in East Pakistan, the land which gave birth to the Muslim League and was in the forefront of the demand for the creation of Pakistan.

That alliance formed in the killing fields of East Pakistan went underground during the Bhutto years only to emerge from the shadows during the anti-Bhutto agitation of 1977 and come fully into its own when Gen Zia seized power soon after. He was a closet mullah himself, sympathetic to the Islamic ideology of the Jamaat’s founder, Syed Abul Al’a Maudoodi.

As Zia went about consolidating power on a string of broken promises (elections in 90 days, etc), humility and hypocrisy his most effective weapons, the Jamaat virtually acted as his civilian auxiliary, its student wing, the Islami Jamiat-i-Tulaba, ever ready to use violence against Bhutto’s supporters.

The Afghan ‘jihad’ strengthened this alliance by drawing other religious parties into its fold. As Saudi and CIA money poured in to fight the Soviets, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), the conduit of this assistance, went from strength to strength, eventually becoming a behemoth with its tentacles in everything, including politics.

Kashmir ‘jihad’ came later when Zia had departed from the scene and Gen Aslam Beg was army chief. When the Soviets exited from Afghanistan, the mujahideen fell to fighting amongst themselves. But some elements were drawn to distant Kashmir where a popular uprising had erupted in 1989.

Pakistan did not invent or manufacture the Kashmir revolt. It couldn’t have done so. Ayub had tried to foment trouble in Kashmir back in 1965 but with what results we all know. It was Indian misrule which pushed Kashmiri youth into picking up the gun. Not that most Indians are inclined to accept this argument, rationality flying out of the window when it comes to Kashmir. Of the many forms of patriotism, denial is one of the most powerful.

India, however, can thank the ISI for messing up the Kashmir uprising by trying to take it under its wing. This was a replay of the Afghan ‘jihad’, a military victory turning into a political disaster. Tactical skill to be of any use must be accompanied by a gift for reading the larger picture.

Gen Musharraf was very much the usual military product, extolling ‘jihad’ and the philosophy underpinning it until his forced conversion to a different mode of thinking post-Sept 11, 2001. Had he been the Ataturk he imagined himself to be, he would have lost no time in reshaping the political landscape and doing away with the nonsense-in-the-name-of-Islam Pakistan had accumulated since the Zia years and which none of his immediate successors — Benazir Bhutto, Nawaz Sharif — had had the courage or vision to sweep away.

If nothing else, the whole of the Hadood Ordinance should have been thrown into the dustbin. But he didn’t do so, losing the momentum every incoming leader enjoys. The result is that he is trying his hands at being a social reformer, donning the mantle of Ataturk — albeit, in truth, a tinpot version of Ataturk — six or seven years too late, that too in small, hesitant doses. The battle now being fought with the mullahs, and indeed precipitated by their own folly, should have been initiated long ago.

But better late than never and let’s hope he doesn’t lose his nerve, nor pays too much heed to the siren counsels of the Q League president, Shujaat Hussain, who has his own axe to grind and who is opposed to the quest for exploring new political options because that would undermine his own importance.

The circle around Musharraf is split between the status quo-ists who want him to keep all his eggs in the Q basket and those pressing him to reach out to other elements (for which read Benazir Bhutto’s PPP). It is still an open question which side prevails.

Will the MMA walk out of the National Assembly? Hard to say but it would be a good thing if they do. It should help Musharraf make up his mind and it just might give that small push towards some form of creative disorder which our politics desperately needs. Next to women — as I have said our acutest problem — our other two problems are mullah nuisance and military dominance. Fighting both together is difficult, therefore a good thing if they have split, allowing both to be dealt with one at a time. Indeed, cutting the holy fathers down to size is an essential prelude to the struggle for democracy.

Friday, November 24, 2006

Indian-Islamic Civilization and Persian Language

AUTHORS: Preserving links
By Asif Farrukhi
Dawn: November 19, 2006

Down to earth and unassuming, Professor Latif Ullah is a reserved and simple man. He shuns publicity and stays away from the limelight. He is the author of five books related to Sufism and poetry and has translated some eight books from Persian into Urdu. Not associated with any of the so-called learned bodies, he carries out his intellectual pursuits with a remarkable degree of independence and personal devotion. This is how I have been seeing him for a long time now; neither green in sawan nor dry in bhadon.

“What’s in a name,” he may ask. Some of his books carry the name Professor S.M. Latifullah, which may sound ponderous in Urdu. He was named Mohammed Latif Ullah by his father but later on added Sohail himself. His full name is documented on his passport, but is hardly ever used. His matriculation certificate states his date of birth as July 1928, but he thinks that it is most probably an estimate. Born in the state of Alwar in Rajastan, he still retains vivid memories of his childhood. He smiles when I ask him if he can recall any childhood pranks. “I was weak and sickly as a child, but I was good at studies. I would remember whatever I studied. I studied Persian and completed my lessons in Sa’adi’s Gulistan,” he says. “Our family was settled in Alwar for many generations, but my uncle used to say that we are from Bukhara.”

About his education he say, “I did my matriculation as a private candidate from the Punjab University in 1946. I was in my second year of intermediate when we came to Pakistan. I joined in as junior clerk in the Education Ministry in December, 1947. In 1959, I took admission in Urdu College and resumed my education,” he recalls with clarity. “We used to have our classes on Sundays. This was a session planned specially for those in service. We were called Sunday students”. He managed to combine his further education with a full time job and proudly recounts, “I did my BA in 1963 and MA from the University of Karachi in 1965.” In October 1966, he joined the Government College for Men, Karachi as a lecturer and it was from there that he retired in July of 1988. He did enroll for a PhD but never got around to completing his dissertation, as by that time he began to devote more time to his study of mysticism and Islam, which proved to be a life-long interest.

“We had a strong family tradition of tassawuf,” he recalls. “My grandfather became a disciple of Abid Shah who had travelled from Muradabad to settle in Alwar. My father had become a disciple of his younger brother, Wahid Ali Shah.” Later in life, he met Maulana Ghulam Mohammed in 1980 and was deeply impressed by him. He started writing during his college days and two of his essays received prizes in students’ competitions. Both of the essays were on seerat. His first book was a study of Ghalib. The book was completed in 1969 but for many years it could not find a publisher. It appeared only in 1998.

His major work is the detailed study Tasawuf aur Siriyat, published by the Idara-i-Saqafat-i-Islamia, Lahore. He also wrote a treatise on Mansur Hallaj, one of the most enigmatic names in the world of Sufism. Well-grounded in classical Persian, he accomplished translations of a number of works related to his field and these include the malfoozat (wisdom literature) of such luminaries as Shah Meena, Jahangir Ashraf Samnani, and a biography of Hazrat Nizamuddin Auliya. He also translated Hassan Sijzi’s Kitab-i-Ishq for the first ever publication of this treatise, about 700 years after it was first written. One of the figures he has studied in detail and written about is the somewhat neglected figure of Ainul Quzzat Hamdani whose Maktoobat are referred to by no less a person than Hazrat Nizam uddin Auliya.

Perhaps his crowning achievement is the recently published Amir Khusrau’s Dibacha to his collection of verses Ghurratul Kamal. A proper treatise in itself, the Dibacha was identified as a basic source for understanding the fundamentals of Indo-Iranian tradition in poetry. Askari, a prominent literary critic, was keen to have it translated into Urdu. The eminent critic Shams ur Rahman Faruqi penned an introduction to this book and praised Professor Latif Ullah’s translation.

His latest book is Rumi’s Payam-i-Ishq. A few years back, he studied Mirabai in close proximity to the Sufi tradition. It is interesting to note that somehow, the Sufi notions of love have emerged as a unifying theme in many of his scholarly works. This may also be related to the position he has adopted. He is interested in religious and devotional work, but has no love lost for mullahs. He says he has disliked them right from his early days. He finds them only partially conversant with the changes taking place in the world and not fond of learning.

Among his future plans, he would like to carry out some more work on the educational psychology of the Quran and is contemplating a translation of Iraqi’s Lam’aat. He feels, in spite of his failing health, that he has the will to undertake more work. “There were hardly any reviews of the works I published. Perhaps very few people could write about these books. But there was no comment. So I gave up thinking that there is no appreciation of serious work and people have almost given up reading,” he says without any bitterness in his voice.

He wrote some poetry in his younger days and even participated in some mushairas in Alwar. “But when I got caught in the grind of clerical work, poetry abandoned me,” he says matter-of-factly. “There was a lot of work and I would only be free from the office late at night. There was just no time. I would go to literary functions once in a while though.” He did publish a small collection of na’ats with the characteristic and intriguing title “Muflis Ki Saughat”.

“Pakistan is undergoing major cultural changes,” he says reflectively. “But the biggest mistake the government is making is adopting a policy of complete neglect of the Persian language. If we had maintained our links with Persian then our grounding in our culture, the Indian-Islamic civilisation, would have been stronger.” He is saddened by the neglect of the study of classical Persian poetry in the curricula. “It is in classical Persian and Urdu poetry that our culture, our beliefs and our views are reflected, and very beautifully so,” he says, being especially concerned by the decline in the quality of teaching. “We have made Persian into a dead language in our institutions,” he says. “The loss has been ours, and it is we who are poorer for this loss.”

Ground Realities in Pashtun region



US faces snowballing Afghan war, says Orakzai

Says US, Nato and Kabul closing their eyes to reality | 50,000 more troops needed | Hopes for treaty in Bajaur
Reuters

ISLAMABAD: The United States and NATO face a snowballing war in Afghanistan and will suffer a military disaster unless they back peaceful means to end the conflict, NWFP Governor Ali Mohammad Jan Orakzai said on Friday.

He said Washington, NATO and the Afghan government were “closing their eyes” to the reality that a military-based strategy was making matters worse. “Either it is lack of understanding or it is a lack of courage to admit their failures,” Orakzai said. “Like in Iraq, it was the lack of courage to admit their faults. They have admitted them now but at very great cost.” Rather than fighting just the Taliban, Orakzai said, NATO forces now faced a wider revolt from Afghanistan’s Pashtun ethnic majority that had grown alienated because of indiscriminate bombings, economic deprivation and a lack of representation. “The people have started joining the Taliban. It is snowballing into a nationalist movement if it has not already become one. It is becoming a sort of war of resistance,” he said. US military officials in Kabul have said insurgent activities have tripled since the truce was called, but Orakzai said linking the statistics to the peace accord was nonsensical. He is now pushing for a similar deal to be struck among the Pashtun tribes on both sides of the border through a jirga, or tribal council, a traditional means of conciliation among warring parties.

“If we can achieve the objectives through political process I think it is the more economical method to do it. If we succeed, very good, and if not who is to deter us from returning to a military strategy,” Orakzai said. The governor said he had outlined his proposal to President George W Bush when he accompanied President Pervez Musharraf to the White House in September. He had told Bush that after five years, the military strategy had failed to achieve any of the US objectives in Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden and Mulla Omar remained at large, reconstruction had been minimal and democracy did not exist beyond “the confines of a few palaces in Kabul”, he said. “It’s time to reflect whether that strategy is working or not. Obviously it is not,” Orakzai said. The 32,000 British-led NATO forces were too few to defeat the insurgency, according to Orakzai. “If they think military is the only option, they should bring another 50,000 troops,” he said, comparing it with the 80,000 men Pakistan had just on the border.

Orakzai dismissed the accusations. He said peace pacts in North and South Waziristan had stopped infiltration and he still hoped for a similar deal in Bajaur. Orakzai said the unrest was spreading before the North Waziristan pact. “If that trend was allowed to continue, it could have threatened the stability of the rest of the country.” President Musharraf sent the army into Waziristan in 2003 to flush out Al Qaeda fighters.

President Musharraf and Afghan President Hamid Karzai have traded allegations over the violence, with Karzai accusing Pakistan of allowing foreign and Pakistani militants and Al Qaeda operatives to use tribal areas in NWFP as a rear base.

Empowering Muslim Women - From New York!



Bid To Bring Female Voice To Islamic Law Ben Arnoldy
Muslim Women From 25 Countries Meet In New York, Forming Council
Christian Science Monitor:November 21, 2006

For centuries, devout Muslims have looked to the fatwa — an opinion based on religious reasoning of a learned individual or committee — for direction on how to resolve moral dilemmas ranging from the mundane to the sublime. And for centuries, Muslim women have conceded the ground, for the most part, to the men who issue these opinions.

That's beginning to change.

Meeting in New York over the weekend, Muslim women from 25 countries began laying groundwork for the first international all-female council formed to issue fatwas. Their idea: to ensure that women's perspectives on Islamic law become part of religious deliberation in the Muslim world — particularly on issues such as domestic violence, divorce, and inheritance.

"There's this growing sense on the part of literate Muslim women ... that there is a vital need for women to confront the Islamic tradition and to work on a par with men in interpreting the sources," says Ann Mayer, an expert in Middle Eastern law at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business. "Otherwise you end up with a very sexist bias in the readings."

The number of women officially sanctioned to issue fatwas is hard to pin down, but certainly tiny. The emergence of such women, known as muftias, usually makes headlines: A religious school in India installed three in 2003, and the Turkish government last year hired two assistant muftias, its first. Governments and schools try to license who can issue fatwas, but Islam stipulates only certain prerequisites, such as knowledge of the Koran and Arabic. As a result, the ranks of unofficial authorities are deeper and the barriers to women surmountable.

Whether the opinions of a women's council will carry any weight, especially in conservative cultures, is another matter. Its advent is proving to be controversial even among Muslim women who share many goals of those launching the council.

"Advancing the idea of reinterpreting the texts has to be done, but I am totally against this initiative because it will have negative effects," says Rebab al-Mahdi, a political scientist at the American University in Cairo. It will be portrayed as part of "a Western cultural invasion," she adds. "This is what conservative clerics always say, and people listen."
For others, doubt is mingled with hope.

"I share some cynicism, but at the same moment, symbols are sometimes important," says Pakistani-born Asma Barlas, a politics professor at Ithaca College in New York and a prominent advocate of jettisoning what she calls male-centric and incorrect interpretations of the Koran. "These little steps, ... even if they don't change anything, do send a message that women are getting together and trying to make their voices heard."

The group is also up against the inertia of tradition. Throughout history, few Muslim women were prominent jurists, though scholars are uncovering more, including, some say, Aisha, the prophet Muhammad's wife. Some question whether much within the religion is open to new interpretation and, by extension, reform. Others note that fatwas are nonbinding and may have little effect on civil law and state judgments.

Still, Muslim women have recently brought change by citing the Koran and other Islamic sources:


In Malaysia, a group called Sisters in Islam used Koranic scholarship to rebuff efforts to exclude Muslims from a domestic-abuse law.


In Saudi Arabia, an effort this summer to push women further back at a crowded holy site in Mecca was thwarted with the help of a female Islamic scholar's arguments.


In the United States, the forthcoming English translation of the Koran by a woman, the first ever, finds an alternate meaning in a verse widely interpreted to give husbands authority to beat their wives as a last resort.

The New York gathering, called the Women's Islamic Initiative in Spirituality and Equity, plans to seat the new council — perhaps seven members — within a year. Drawn from diverse schools within Islam, the members will be versed in Islamic law. The group also plans to give scholarships for more women to pursue advanced training — open to women in places like Morocco, Egypt, and Iran — in an effort to broaden the qualified pool.

"Islam is a religion of law, and it is important to express the principles of social justice within the framework of Islamic law," says Daisy Khan, executive director of the American Society for Muslim Advancement and leader of the effort. "This is why we need muftias, in order to do that. Otherwise, it falls on deaf ears."

Traditionally, religious legal authority was local, vested in muftis and other leaders who attained their status via government appointment or community esteem. But today's global communications are challenging that, as more Muslims seek religious opinions far and wide through the Internet. The women's council takes advantage of this: Its members will be in different places, taking questions and conferring over the Web.

Given this wider marketplace of ideas, the new council's credibility will be determined by the quality of its legal reasoning, and whether its logic strikes a chord, say several scholars and observers.

"There is a sense among many Muslims — particularly, but not exclusively, women — that Islamic jurists are out of touch, that their guidance is not adequate to the modern world. And if this shura council succeeds in bridging that gap, it may be speaking to an audience that doesn't currently consider itself bound by the pronouncements of existing groups," says Kecia Ali, assistant professor of religion at Boston University.

"But this is going to be a tremendously challenging task because religious authority, even scholarly authority, has always been contested," she adds. "It is in matters related to women, marriage, sexuality that Muslim intellectuals on both conservative and modernist sides of the spectrum have chosen to wage their epic battle."

For others, the council has a credibility problem right out of the gate. "It should not have happened in New York, because it will set back the agenda of women given the current political upheaval [over the Iraq war]," says Mohammad Reda, a Syrian-American Muslim in the Boston area often sought out for his religious opinions. He supports the idea that "women should stand up and give their own opinions on women's issues," but says American efforts to force change in the Muslim world, as in Iraq, mean reformers now must avoid links to the U.S. The New York conference used money from nongovernmental foundations, some based in the U.S.

Conference attendees say a muftia council could prompt wider support for women's struggles. "The women who we're trying to help, for them religion is very important," says Zainah Anwar, head of the Malaysian group Sisters in Islam. "It's empowering for them to know that their desire to not be beaten by their husband can actually be justified in the name of Islam."

© 2006 The Christian Science Monitor. All rights reserved.

Pashtun Jirga for Peace: Will it Work under the Circumstances?

Jirga for peace
By Rahimullah Yusufzai: The News, November 24, 2006

The Pakhtun amn (peace) jirga hosted by the Awami National Party (ANP) in Peshawar on November 20 was the first of its kind and it seems there will be a few more in the coming months. The event brought together Pakhtun politicians, religious scholars, intellectuals, ex-bureaucrats and diplomats, and artistes, all sharing the carpeted stage despite having conflicting political views. Some of the participants were non-Pakhtun but they belonged to the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and as such were sons of the soil.

Almost all the speakers highlighted the pain that they had suffered due to the continuing violence in the Pakhtun-inhabited areas across the 2,500-kilometre long Durand Line border in Afghanistan and Pakistan. They voiced the yearning of the Pakhtuns for peace in a region that has been turned into a battlefield by the world and regional powers. It was pointed out time and again from the stage that bloodshed had been going on in the Pakhtun lands for the last 28 years and had gradually spread from Afghanistan to the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and rest of NWFP and Balochistan. The ANP-sponsored jirga, held at the Bacha Khan Markaz named after freedom-fighter and apostle of non-violence, Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan, or Bacha Khan as he was called out of reverence, was essentially an attempt to create awareness among the Pakhtuns about the need to put out the fire that is burning their homes and threatening their livelihoods. It was also an effort to remind the mostly alien combatants, including western armies and Al Qaeda fighters, that they risked becoming unwelcome if they continued to occupy and use the Pakhtun land as a battleground for achieving their strategic goals.

Jirgas are a time-honoured tradition in tribal societies such as that of the Pakhtuns, who more than others have stuck to it as an effective forum to resolve disputes and peacefully put an end to conflicts. A jirga, which literally means sitting in a circle, is essentially an assembly of tribal and religious elders in which unanimous decisions are taken to resolve petty as well as serious disputes involving murders, ownership of property, thefts, matters of honours, etc. Inter-tribal conflicts were also resolved by bigger jirgas drawn from all Pakhtun tribes and areas. The loya jirgas evolved in Afghanistan and were constituted whenever the Afghans faced external aggression or wanted to embark on expeditions aimed at conquering neighbouring countries. At a later stage, the Afghan loya jirgas were also convened to frame that country's constitution and repose confidence in a ruler or government.

The concept and function of jirgas has changed over the years. The jirgas convened by governments are stuffed with their nominees who make decisions favouring the rulers. The independent jirgas, such as those called by the tribes in FATA, mostly take decisions in keeping with riwaj (customs) and tribal traditions and in line with Islamic injunctions. There is no doubt the power of jirgas has diminished due to a host of reasons, ranging from government and political interference to the rise of moneyed classes able to influence tribal elders and clergymen. Jirgas like the one arranged by the ANP will have political and moral weight only because there is no official sanction for their decisions to be implemented.

The resolution adopted by the Pakhtun peace jirga called for unity among all Pakhtuns to stop the bloodshed in the areas populated by them on both sides of the Durand Line. It demanded an end to interference in Afghanistan's affairs and condemned the use of force to settle disputes. The jirga showed concern over deterioration of the security situation in FATA after becoming a turf of conflict between armed combatants including foreigners and called for empowering the tribal Pakhtuns by granting them fundamental rights and undertaking political and administrative reforms with their consent. The jirga also demanded investigation of incidents in FATA in which indiscriminate use of military force was made and awarding punishment to those found guilty in accordance with the law. This was obviously prompted by the October 30 bombing of the religious school in Chingai village in Bajaur in which 80 people, mostly young students, were killed. In fact, the Bajaur attack, blamed by most Pakistanis on the US military despite claims by the Pakistan government that its own gunship helicopters were responsible for the missile strikes, served as the catalyst for the ANP to hold its jirga in Peshawar.

The measure of the jirga's success was the positive response of almost all the invitees, whether political or non-political, to participate in its deliberations. Top leadership of political parties, except the ruling PML and interior minister Aftab Sherpao's PPP which sent their low-ranked representatives, attended the jirga and spoke to the audience, composed mostly of ANP activists wearing red caps. The religio-political parties, which have emerged as the main rival to the national and secular parties such as the ANP for the Pakhtun vote, were adequately represented. Jamaat-i-Islami's NWFP head Sirajul Haq was there making an emotional speech and blaming the Pakistani generals for the suffering of the people, particularly the Pakhtuns.

The JUI-F and MMA supremo Maulana Fazlur Rahman came in person and dominated one of the sessions by making the unusual declaration that the Durand Line border was still a matter of dispute between Afghanistan and Pakistan and by reminding that deployment of 80,000 Pakistan Army troops in the border areas in FATA was a violation of the more than 100-year old Gandamak agreement signed by the then government of British India and Afghanistan. He also offered to mediate between the Taliban and the Afghan government and its American sponsors, provided the Taliban were not labelled as terrorists and provided with a level playing field to take part in Afghanistan's politics. For that to happen, Maulana Fazlur Rahman wanted President Hamid Karzai to break himself free of the US and operate independently after getting rid of the occupying foreign forces in Afghanistan.

However, there was little doubt that the jirga was a show of Pakhtun nationalists. The ANP called the shots and got the jirga to adopt a resolution designed to advance the party's line on the situation obtaining in the borderlands of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Mahmod Khan Achakzai, the ultra Pakhtun nationalist and leader of the Balochistan-centred Pakhtunkhwa Milli Awami Party (PMAP), was his usual ebullient self, criticising all those who held a different view and robustly defending his stance that the Soviet military intervention in Afghanistan in 1979 and the US invasion in 2001 was justified in view of the foreign interference in the Central Asian country by an assortment of players ranging from the ISI and CIA to Al Qaeda. His partisan views could have split the jirga had it not been for ANP president Asfandyar Wali Khan, who wisely refrained from highlighting divisive issues and strived to achieve a consensus among his invitees holding divergent political views. This was in keeping with the dignity and norms of a jirga, where participants often let go their pride to arrive at a consensus for the common good of their people.

It is obvious the Pakhtun peace jirga will enable the ANP to gain political mileage and enable it to claim that it took a timely step to end the bloodshed in Pakhtun territory. Subsequent jirgas would add to the value of the ANP initiative and primarily follow its lead in demanding an end to hostilities in the Pakhtun belt. There is a possibility of convening similar jirgas in Quetta and FATA and participants could include representatives of Pakhtuns inhabiting lands as far as the US, Europe, Arab countries and the Far East. Then there are plans to hold state-sponsored grand Pakhtun tribal jirgas in Afghanistan and Pakistan in line with the decision taken by presidents George W Bush, General Pervez Musharraf and Hamid Karzai in their summit meeting last summer in Washington.

Jirgas are thus becoming fashionable and bigger and those unfamiliar with the name and the tradition are getting to know it better. Still all these jirgas will be unable to deliver if those sponsoring them use the event as a vehicle to achieve narrow political goals. Jirgas succeed when parties to the conflict get an equal hearing and decisions are made independently and by consensus. That is unlikely to happen in the prevailing circumstances. So we could have as many jirgas as we want but none would be able to deliver until those sitting on the jirgas are authorised by the powers that be, whether Afghanistan, Pakistan, the US and NATO, or non-state actors like Al Qaeda, to take any decision for the sake of peace.

The writer is an executive editor of The News International based in Peshawar. Email: bbc@pes.comsats.net.pk

India-China Relations Warming up

Hu favours Council seat for India
Amit Baruah
The Hindu, November 24, 2006

Both sides moving in the "right direction" on civilian nuclear cooperation, say officials
NEW DELHI: Chinese President Hu Jintao has gone "beyond" the support extended by Premier Wen Jiabao to India for a permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council, according to senior South Block officials.

Mr. Hu told Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Tuesday that China would be happy to see India in the Council, the officials said on Thursday.

Referring to a provision in Tuesday's joint declaration that India and China should have regular summits, they said the idea was to have annual meetings in either of the two countries. From the Chinese side, either the President or the Premier could be present.

"Negatives" discussed


While maintaining that relations with China required "careful management," the officials warned that if negatives were allowed to dominate, the relationship would go nowhere. At the same time, the two sides did discuss "negatives."

"We are under no illusions that it is a complex relationship, and a whole lot of issues need to be addressed," the officials said. They, however, were satisfied with the "outcomes" generated Mr. Hu's visit.

On references to civilian nuclear cooperation in the joint declaration, they felt that the two sides were moving in the "right direction," but refused to discuss the specifics. They pointed out that China had responded positively to India's formulations on civilian nuclear cooperation, as reflected in the joint declaration.

Mr. Hu told Dr. Singh that Beijing entered into a "strategic and cooperative" partnership with India not due to political expediency, but on account of a long-term decision taken by its leadership.

The officials said Dr. Singh told Mr. Hu that India welcomed Chinese investment. Quoting Chinese Commerce Ministry statistics, they said Chinese companies (till September 2006) executed projects worth $1.4 billion and bagged works worth $6.4 billion in India.

Some cases of non-approval had been publicised in the press, but as many as 90 per cent of clearances sought by Chinese companies was granted.

On the visa front, the officials pointed out that 1,800 visas were issued recently to Chinese technicians involved in a Reliance pipeline project after the Petroleum Ministry took up the issue. Also, businesspersons could get a multiple-entry visa for six months, while five-year employments visas were also being issued to Chinese.

Trading agreement


The officials said the regional trading arrangement being discussed included the concept of a free trade area. In case experts, who are scheduled to submit their report in October 2007, found such an arrangement feasible, the two sides would begin detailed talks.

On the boundary issue, Dr. Singh and Mr. Hu had reached a "strong consensus" that an early settlement must be pursued, and called on the Special Representatives to accelerate their efforts.

Pointing out that a settlement was not round the corner, the officials, said the two countries were committed to reaching an agreement. Both were aware that the strategic partnership would remain "incomplete" till a boundary agreement was reached.

Thursday, November 23, 2006

What is going to happen in Iraq?

Secret story of US retreat in Iraq
Daily Times Monitor: November 23, 2006

LAHORE: According to credible Iraqi sources in London and Amman, a secret story of America’s diplomatic exit strategy from Iraq is rapidly unfolding, The Huffington Post reports.

The report says that key events include: First, James Baker told one of Saddam Hussein’s lawyers that Tariq Aziz, former deputy prime minister, would be released from detention by the end of this year, in hope that he will negotiate with the US on behalf of the Baath Party leadership. The discussion recently took place in Amman, according to the Iraqi paper al-Quds al-Arabi.

Second, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice personally appealed to the Gulf Cooperation Council in October to serve as intermediaries between the US and armed Sunni resistance groups not including Al Qaeda, communicating a US willingness to negotiate with them at any time or place. Speaking in early October, Rice joked that if then-Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld “heard me now, he would wage a war on me fiercer and hotter than he waged on Iraq”, according to an Arab diplomat privy to the closed session.

Third, there was an “unprecedented” secret meeting of high-level Americans and representatives of “a primary component of the Iraqi resistance” two weeks ago, lasting for three days. As a result, the Iraqis agreed to return to the talks in the next two weeks with a response for the American side, according to Jordanian press leaks and al-Quds al-Arabi.

Fourth, detailed email transmissions dated November 16 reveal an active American effort behind the scenes to broker a peace agreement with Iraqi resistance leaders, a plot that could include a political coup against Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki.

Fifth, Bush security adviser Stephen Hadley carried a six-point message for Iraqi officials on his recent trip to Baghdad: include Iraqi resistance and opposition leaders in any initiative towards national reconciliation; general amnesty for the armed resistance fighters; dissolve the Iraqi commission charged with banning the Baath Party; start the disbanding of militias and death squads; cancel any federalism proposal to divide Iraq into three regions, and combine central authority for the central government with greater self-rule for local governors; distribute oil revenues in a fair manner to all Iraqis, including the Sunnis whose regions lack the resource.

According to the report, Prime Minister Al-Maliki was unable to accept the American proposals because of his institutional allegiance to Shiite parties who believe their historic moment has arrived after one thousand years of Sunni domination. That Shiite refusal has accelerated secret American efforts to pressure, reorganise, or remove the elected al-Maliki regime from power.

The backstory: Underlying these developments are three American concerns: first, the deepening quagmire and sectarian strife on the battlefield; second, the mid-year American elections in which voters repudiated the war; and third, the strategic concern that the new Iraq has slipped into the orbit of Iran, The Huffington Post report says.

It remains to be seen if Iran will exercise influence on its Shiite allies in Iraq {the Grand Ayatollah Sistani was born in Iraq, and the main Shiite bloc was created in Iran by Iraqi exiles]. But that is the direction being taken by Baker’s Iraq Study Group and former CIA director John Deutch in a New York Times editorial. The principal US track, in addition to a declared withdrawal plan, should be to work towards a hands-off policy by Iran, at least for an interval, according to Deutch.

This possible endgame has been in the making for some time. Even two years ago, US officials were probing contacts with Iraqi resistance groups distinct from Al Qaeda. Recent polls indicate sixty percent Iraqi support for armed resistance against the United States, while approximately eighty percent of Iraqis support some timetable for withdrawal, an indispensable indicator for Iraqi insurgents laying down some arms.

Even before the 2003 US invasion, peace groups like Global Exchange and the newly-forming Code Pink sent delegations to create people-to-people relations with Iraqi opponents of the occupation and members of civil society, the report says.

"Arms for Peace" Fair



Pakistan holds 'arms for peace' fair
By Syed Shoaib Hassan BBC News, Karachi

Pakistan is bolstering its position as a trading zone for small arms and military hardware through arms fairs that have become a regular feature in recent years.
The International Defence Exhibition and Seminar (Ideas) fair, held every

two years in the southern port city of Karachi, provides a platform for Pakistan to display its products, ranging from light arms to tanks and missiles.

The fair also attracts major manufacturers of arms and military support equipment from around the world.

Since 2000, when the first Ideas fair was held, the number of participants has grown both in number and prestige.

This year's participants include, among others, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, Saab, Rolls Royce and Thales.

Some governments also have an official presence. The UK is represented by the Ministry of Defence.

'Global security'


"We are looking to promote industrial cooperation in products which are geared towards the war on terror and humanitarian operations," the press secretary at the UK High Commission, Adam Thomas, told the BBC.

The theme of the five-day fair, which was inaugurated by President Pervez Musharraf on Monday, is Expanding Global Security.


Arms for Peace is the official slogan of the fair.

On show are products ranging from rifles and bullets to ballistic missiles, pilot less drone aircraft and fighter jets.

Lockheed Martin Corp (LMC) has put its Hellfire missiles on display.

"Pakistan is interested in buying these missiles and we are definitely going to work out a deal," said Doug Terrell, LMC's manager for international business development.

The missiles became famous during the war on terror and are known to have hit many targets in Afghanistan and the Pakistani tribal areas.

LMC is also promoting its coveted F-16 Fighting Falcon as well as the more affordable P-3C Orion and C-130 aircraft.

"We have (displayed) a limited range in view of the customers who would be here," says Dexter Henson, the communications director of LMC.

Old and new

The buyers, as in any arms fair around the world, are mostly from Asian and African countries that have low budgets and, as many anti-weapons campaigners would allege, poor human rights records.

Buyers were crowding to the American manufacturer Colt's small arms stall where the company's manager of international sales, Mike McCarthy, explained the virtues of a Colt M4 carbine, "the assault weapon of the US army".

"We hope to offer it for sale to the Pakistan government," he said.

Pakistan has showcased its usual products, such as long range missiles and two battle tanks, al-Khalid and al-Zarrar.

But it has also displayed some new items, such as a locally manufactured pilot less drone aircraft.

It has also displayed the prototype of JF-17 Thunder jet, manufactured jointly with China.

There is also a variety of electronic warfare devices and small arms made in Pakistan which some visitors described as "impressive".

How much of a boost they will prove to Pakistan's arms trade remains to be seen.

Wednesday, November 22, 2006

Disappearing Journalists: Who is Behind all this?

Disappearing journalists
Husain Haqqani
The Nation, November 22, 2006

The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), which represents more than half a million journalists in over 115 countries, has described the state of press freedom in Pakistan as “rapidly skidding towards lawlessness,” and entering a state of crisis. During the last six months, Pakistan has seen four journalists killed and each of the four cases remains unsolved. The younger brothers of two journalists were brutally murdered, as if to teach the older brothers a lesson. In addition, four journalists were reportedly detained and tortured by intelligence agencies.

The latest victim of what Amnesty International calls “enforced disappearances” is Dilawar Khan Wazir, a BBC Urdu service reporter in Pakistan’s tribal region of South Waziristan. He has not been heard of since leaving Islamabad for home on the morning of Monday, November 20. On November 1, the body of Mohammad Ismail, Islamabad bureau chief for Pakistan Press International (PPI) was found near his home in Islamabad with his head smashed. Ismail had no money or known enemies and it is unlikely that he was killed during a robbery or as a result of any personal conflict.

On September 15, Maqbool Hussain Sail, correspondent of the news agency Online, died on the way to hospital after being shot by unidentified attackers. Sail was reportedly on his way to meet a local leader of the opposition Pakistan People Party (PPP) when he was shot.

Earlier, in June, the body The Nation’s North Waziristan correspondent Hayatullah Khan was discovered six months after his abduction, which had followed his news reports exposing as false the government account of the killing of an Al-Qaeda member in the tribal areas. The government had claimed that Abu Hamza Rabia was killed in explosion caused by bombs that he was making. Hayatullah Khan produced photos that established conclusively that Rabia was killed by US-made missiles fired from an unmanned CIA aircraft.

Munir Ahmed Sangi, cameraman for the Sindhi-language Kawish Television Network (KTN), was fatally shot on May 29 while covering a story on a gunfight between members of the Unar and Abro tribes in the town of Larkana, in Sindh. IFJ believes that Sangi may have been targeted because of reports by KTN and the Sindhi newspaper Kawish on the punishment of a boy and a girl by a local Jirga (tribal council). Sangi’s reports contradicted the claims of the Pakistan government about advancing “enlightened moderation” just as Hayatullah’s reporting questioned the veracity of official claims about its role in the global war against terrorism.

Another journalist with the Sindhi newspaper Kawish, Mehruddin Marri, was abducted on June 27, only to be released on October 24 after four months of torture by military intelligence officers. Saeed Sarbazi was abducted by intelligence agencies on September 20 and returned late in the evening of September 22. He was reportedly beaten and kicked in addition to being blindfolded for over 50 hours and prohibited from eating or sleeping.

Geo News reporter Mukesh Rupeta and freelance cameraman Sanjay Kumar went missing on March 6, after being detained by Pakistani authorities for videotaping the Jacobabad airbase, in Sindh. Nothing more was heard from Rupeta and Kumar by their employers or family until June 22, when their arrest was officially announced and they were admitted to hospital because of their deteriorating health. They were released on bail on June 23. One of the founders of the Balochi-language TV station Baloch Voice, Munir Mengal, is still missing after disappearing on April 7.

Since the October military takeover, the present regime has presented itself as a benignly authoritarian establishment that allows freedom of the media. On several occasions, General Musharraf has cited his patience of diverse opinions in the media to justify that his administration is more democratic in spirit than previous elected civilian governments. But in reality, the Pakistani authorities’ policies over the last six years can best be described as “selective repression.”

There is no doubt that civilian politicians, such as Mian Nawaz Sharif, had a low threshold for personal criticism – a fact I know personally from my detention during his second term. Mr Sharif, and during the 1970s Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, used blunt instruments of coercion against well known media critics, creating a widely held perception of repression. Pakistan’s generals, beginning with the late General Ziaul Haq, learnt a lesson from the resentment built against the civilian leaders as a result of their high profile actions against the media. Both Ziaul Haq and Musharraf have shown the ability to accept personal criticism and have avoided taking action against well-known critics, especially ones whose writings are unlikely to foment a revolution in the first place.

The generals’ model of media control is to target poor but well informed reporters not known to the English speaking urban gentry. If the worst truth about regime policies does not come out from where the action actually takes place –Waziristan, Larkana, remote parts of Balochistan—then the state machinery can continue to harp on its broad mindedness. Internationally well known media personalities can criticise the regime, while at the same time securing for it high marks for allowing the criticism. But the criticism must be of the drawing room variety, covering issues that do not cause the masses to question the military’s authority.

The model of media control under this government has been to make examples of reporters on ground that would then make others toe the line. Media freedom since 1999, though considerable, has still been within well-defined parameters. The parameters for the English language media have been wider than for the vernacular press. Multiple TV channels have been opened without giving credit to the elected leaders under whom the concept of private television channel ownership was first mooted. Many more topics have been opened to discussion on radio and TV, and criticising the President has been allowed quite widely.

At the same time, key issues have still been kept out of bounds or subject to self-censorship by owners of media outlets. The government wants to arrogate to itself the right of identifying issues over which it might be criticised. Touchy subjects include discussion of the role of Pakistan’s invisible government, the intelligence services, and the corruption or self-aggrandisement of this regime’s key figures.

Human rights and sovereignty violations in the war against terrorism must be kept under wraps. The dirty war against fellow Pakistanis in Balochistan cannot be reported except in vague and general terms. Opinions critical of the military regime are allowed but facts that back up these opinions must not be revealed. That way, those in authority can keep reassuring their international backers and domestic supporters that all is well and the ranting of critics in the media is only the expression of frustration by opinionated semi-politicians bearing a grudge against them or their appointees.

Historically, the sensitivity of a regime in Pakistan to dissent and truth telling is often directly proportional to its feelings of vulnerability. Overt repression is less in days of self-confidence and more in periods of insecurity. The current rise in murder and abduction of journalists speaks volumes about the anxiety of Pakistan’s current rulers over their ability to continue to indefinitely control the unfortunate people of Pakistan.
E-mail: hhaqqani@nation.com.pk

Honoring Nobel Laureate Dr. Abdus Salam



EDITORIAL: The tragedy of our treatment of Dr Abdus Salam
Daily Times, November 22, 2006

Dr Abdus Salam (1926-1996) died ten years ago. He was the first Pakistani to get a Nobel Prize in 1979. But he might be the last if we continue to allow our state to evolve in a way that frightens the rest of the world. Our collective psyche runs more to accepted ‘wisdom’ than to scientific inquiry; and even if we were to display an uncharacteristic outcropping of individual genius the world may be so frightened of it that it might not give us our deserts.

We are scared of honouring Dr Salam because of our constitution which we have amended to declare his community as ‘non-Muslim’. When Dr Salam died in 1996 he had to be buried in Pakistan because he refused to give up his Pakistani nationality and acquire another that respected him more. But the Pakistani state was afraid of touching his dead body. He was therefore buried in Rabwa, the home town of his Ahmedi community whose name is also unacceptable to us and has been changed to Chenab Nagar by a state proclamation. But that was not the end of the story. After he was buried, the pious, law-abiding and constitution-loving people of Jhang, which is nearby, went over to Chenab Nagar to see if all had been done according to the constitutional provisions regarding the Ahmedi community to which he belonged.



And what did the constitution say? It said that the Ahmedis are not Muslims, that they may not call themselves Muslims, nor say the kalima or use any of the symbols of Islam. The original amendments to the constitution were passed by Z A Bhutto, a ‘liberal socialist-democrat’, and subsequent tightening of the law was done by the great patriot General Zia-ul Haq. Thus both the civilians and the khakis had connived in the great betrayal of Dr Salam.

After the great scientist was buried in Chenab Nagar, his tombstone said ‘Abdus Salam the First Muslim Nobel Laureate’. Needless to say, the police arrived with a magistrate and rubbed off the ‘Muslim’ part of the katba. Now the tombstone says: Abdus Salam the First Nobel Laureate. The magistrate remained unfazed by what he had done but Dr Salam’s grave is actually the tombstone of a Muslim culture that Pakistan had inherited from the founder of the nation, Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah. But ironies fly thick in Pakistan. In Jhang, for example, where Dr Salam grew up as a precocious child, the schools that he endowed with scholarships and grants now teach communal hatred rather than the love that he had in mind when he gave them his money.

Meanwhile, the Ahmedi community is under daily pressure and anyone with a twisted mind is free to persecute them.

Abdus Salam was born in Jhang in 1926. At the age of 14, he got the highest marks ever recorded for the Matriculation Examination in Punjab. The whole town turned out to welcome him. He won a scholarship to Government College, Lahore, and took his MA in 1946. In the same year he was awarded a scholarship to St. John’s College, Cambridge, where he took a BA (honours) with a double First in mathematics and physics in 1949. In 1950 he received the Smith’s Prize from Cambridge University for the most outstanding pre-doctoral contribution to physics. He also obtained a PhD in theoretical physics at Cambridge; his thesis, published in 1951, contained fundamental work in quantum electrodynamics which had already gained him an international reputation.

In 1954 Dr Salam left his native country for a lectureship at Cambridge University. Before the Pakistani politicians apostatised him, he was a member of the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission, a member of the Scientific Commission of Pakistan and Chief Scientific Adviser to the President from 1961 to 1974. Pakistan’s space research agency Suparco was created by him and it is only symbolic that a group of Shia workers of Suparco were put to death in Karachi in 2004 by sectarian terrorists. Like Dr Salam, a lot of gifted Shia doctors have had to leave Pakistan because of the state’s twisted policies.

Dr Abdus Salam got his Nobel Prize for Physics in 1979. It was a most embarrassing moment for General Zia who had ‘supplemented’ the Second Amendment to the constitution with further comic disabilities against the Ahmedis. He had to welcome the great scientist and had to be seen with him on TV. Since the clerical part of his government was already bristling, he took care to clip those sections of Dr Salam’s speech where he had said the kalima or otherwise used an Islamic expression. It was Dr Salam’s good luck that one of the believers did not go to court under Zia’s own laws to get the country’s only Nobel laureate sent to prison for six months of rigorous imprisonment. Dr Salam then went to India where he was received with great fanfare. He had gone there to simply meet his primary school mathematics teacher who was still alive. When the two met, Dr Salam took off his Nobel medal and put it around the neck of his teacher.

Let us admit in a whisper that Pakistan did issue a stamp commemorating Dr Salam years ago — lest the government come under pressure to remove it from circulation. It is also true that his alma mater, Government College Lahore, now a university, has named certain ancillary departments and academic sessions after him following a long period of obscurantist domination. But Pakistan needs to feel guilty about what it has done to the greatest scientist it ever produced in comparison to the lionisation of Dr AQ Khan who has brought ignominy and the label of ‘rogue state’ to Pakistan by selling the country’s nuclear technology for personal gain. Can we redeem ourselves by doing something in Dr Salam’s memory on this 10th anniversary of his passing that would please his soul and cleanse ours? *