Wednesday, October 31, 2007

U.S. and Pakistan: A Frayed Alliance?

U.S. and Pakistan: A Frayed Alliance: As Military Efforts Falter, Trust Suffers By Joby Warrick, Washington Post, October 31, 2007; A01

Five years ago, elite Pakistani troops stationed near the border with Afghanistan began receiving hundreds of pairs of U.S.-made night-vision goggles that would enable them to see and fight al-Qaeda and Taliban insurgents in the dark. The sophisticated goggles, supplied by the Bush administration at a cost of up to $9,000 a pair, came with an implicit message: Step up the attacks.

But every three months, the troops had to turn in their goggles for two weeks to be inventoried, because the U.S. military wanted to make sure none were stolen or given away, U.S. and Pakistani officials said. Militants perceived a pattern and scurried into the open without fear during the two-week counts.

"They knew exactly when we didn't have the goggles, and they took full advantage," said a senior Pakistani government official who closely tracks military operations on the border.

The goggles are but a fragment of the huge military aid Washington sends to Pakistan, but the frustrations expressed by Pakistani officials are emblematic of a widening gulf between two military powers that express a common interest in defeating terrorism.

The Bush administration has provided nearly $11 billion in aid to Pakistan since 2001, most of it in military hardware and cash support for the country's operating budget. But frustrations are rising among military officers on both sides because the aid has produced neither battlefield success nor great trust, said government officials and independent experts who study relations between the two countries.

U.S. officials say part of the problem is that the Pakistani government has lacked sufficient commitment to engage the enemy, a task that may be further undermined by the country's growing political instability as its leadership is challenged by an invigorated opposition.

U.S. equipment is not being used "in a sustained way," said Seth Jones, a Rand Corp. researcher who recently visited the region. "The army is not very effective, and there have been elements of the government that have worked with the Taliban in the tribal areas in the past," making them ambivalent about the current fight against those forces, he said.

Independent Western experts also wonder whether Pakistan is devoting too much of U.S. aid to large weapons systems, while shortchanging its own counterinsurgency forces; they say it also is not spending enough on social problems that might address the root causes of terrorism. Of $1.6 billion in U.S. aid dedicated to security assistance in Pakistan since 2002, for example, more than half went for purchases of major weapons systems sought by Pakistan's army, including F-16 fighters, according to U.S. officials.

The officials and experts also say U.S. aid has typically lacked sufficient oversight, or any means of measuring its effectiveness.

The aid spigot -- now pegged at more than $150 million a month -- has remained open even during periods when Pakistan's leadership ordered its counterterrorism forces confined to barracks under a cease-fire agreement with the insurgents, the officials note.

Pakistani officials, for their part, say that strict U.S. controls over equipment and a failure to provide other equipment, such as spare parts, have impeded their ability to hunt down Taliban and al-Qaeda sympathizers. In addition to complaining about the goggles, they cite U.S.-made attack helicopters that are grounded for weeks because of parts shortages.

Pakistani officials acknowledge slow progress in driving terrorists out of the frontier provinces, but they chafe at suggestions that U.S. military aid is being squandered. Pakistan needs still more help, including persistent access to night-vision goggles, helicopters and other gear that is particularly useful in fighting an insurgency, said Mahmud Ali Durrani, Pakistan's ambassador to the United States.

"Is our military effort going as well as we hoped? No. But is Iraq going as well as hoped?" Durrani asked. "We will fight terrorism because it is for our own good. But it is a very big job."

By most measures, the country's security problems are worsening. Hundreds of government troops have died in clashes with militants since August, including at least 17 killed last Thursday in an attack on an army convoy. A total of seven people died in a suicide bombing yesterday near the president's army residence. U.S. intelligence officials said two months ago that al-Qaeda has managed to build an operating base inside autonomous tribal areas ostensibly controlled by Pakistan.

"The billions of American taxpayer dollars to Pakistan since September 11 have clearly failed to prevent our number one enemy from setting up shop in that country," said Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a frequent critic of Bush administration policies in Pakistan. "It's hard to argue that this aid has been an overall success when that's the bottom-line result."

Advanced night-vision equipment of the type provided to Pakistan -- which amplifies tiny amounts of infrared light to spot people, equipment and other heat sources -- has been used by American GIs for more than a decade. But when President Pervez Musharraf's government requested them in 2002 and 2003 for use against insurgents fleeing across the border from Afghanistan, U.S. officials initially voiced serious reservations.

Eventually, after the accounting procedures were put in place, Washington provided more than 1,600 to Pakistani forces, according to figures compiled by Alan Kronstadt, a South Asia specialist with the Congressional Research Service. Pakistan was allowed to purchase about 300 from a U.S. contractor, and the rest -- about 1,300 pairs of goggles valued at $6.4 million -- were provided without charge by the Defense and State departments, Kronstadt said. A small number were also provided to Pakistan by U.S. intelligence agencies, said U.S. officials and independent experts.

The Pentagon's monitoring is conducted under a special program -- EUM, or Enhanced End-Use Monitoring -- that allows U.S. officials in Pakistan to check all the serial numbers every three months.

To Pakistani soldiers, giving up the goggles meant that, for up to eight weeks each year, they had to fight blind against an adversary who quickly caught on to the troops' vulnerability and exploited it, said two Pakistani government officials familiar with the issue. The policy was also considered insulting.

"It says, 'We don't trust you,' " said Durrani, the Pakistani ambassador. "We need more night-vision equipment, but every three months you withdraw what we have. This is what happens when bureaucrats dictate policy."

A Pentagon official acknowledged the complaints and said the department plans to conduct less-frequent checks. "We are working closely with Pakistani authorities to ensure a proper balance of security and accountability requirements with their operational needs," said Air Force Lt. Col. Todd Vician, a Defense Department spokesman.

But U.S.-Pakistan frictions extend to other parts of the U.S. aid program. No other country receives more assistance from Washington for military training, and since 2001, Pakistan has received more than $6 billion from the Coalition Support Fund, government documents show. That's 10 times as much as Poland, the No. 2 recipient, according to Pentagon documents obtained by the Center for Public Integrity, a Washington nonprofit group. The fund reimburses U.S. allies for costs incurred in fighting global terrorism.

The aid has not bought much goodwill: A poll in August conducted for the Washington-based nonprofit group Terror Free Tomorrow found that 19 percent of Pakistanis held a favorable view of the United States, down from 26 percent the previous year. Osama bin Laden had a far higher approval rating, at 46 percent, than either Musharraf (38 percent) or President Bush (9 percent).

Shuja Nawaz, a longtime Pakistani journalist in Washington who recently published a book on Pakistan's military, said the country's army leaders frequently complain about the type as well as amount of support they get from the United States.

"The United States asked Pakistan to move its troops into areas where they aren't supposed to be, and then it failed to provide them with what they need most: operational training and support for converting from conventional warfare to counterinsurgency," Nawaz said. "The United States was very efficient in giving out money quickly, but the concern is whether it was the right kind of help."

The large weapons systems Washington has funded have little relevance to terrorism and counterinsurgency, said Hassan Abbas, a former Pakistani government official who is now a research fellow at Harvard University. "The money is mostly to make Musharraf happy and to engage the Pakistani army as an institution," he said. Meanwhile, civilian law enforcement agencies scramble for adequate training and weapons.

The U.S. government could do more to improve security by helping Pakistan address rampant poverty and shore up schools and health care -- attacking the root causes of militancy and terrorism, according to an August study of the U.S. aid program by the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Less than a tenth of overall U.S. aid to Pakistan since 2001 has gone to support the country's economy and social infrastructure, including about $64 million for schools -- a sum smaller than the funding level for education in a typical small U.S. city, said the CSIS report, written by Craig Cohen and directed by Frederick Barton and Karin von Hippel.

"We just haven't put very much into securing hearts and minds," Barton said. "It is possible to generate goodwill. If the United States were the champion of teachers in Pakistan, we'd probably all be okay."

Divisions within Pakistan's Middle Class on how to Tackle Extremism

Urban Pakistanis split on militants
As violence intensifies once again in the tribal areas, polls reveal divisions among the middle class on whether a military response is the best answer to extremism.
By Shahan Mufti | The Christian Science Monitor; October 31, 2007

Islamabad, Pakistan
The suicide bombing a few kilometers away from the Army's General Headquarters in Rawalpindi on Tuesday afternoon left at least seven dead and dozens wounded. It also reinforced fears that Pakistan's more rapidly modernizing major cities and towns may now feel the fight that the Pakistani Army has lately taken to the militants in its remote tribal areas.

Despite the increasing violence, many educated urban-dwellers – part of a growing middle class of moderate, educated Pakistanis – find themselves stuck in the middle of a war that they are still reluctant to embrace as their own. The public's lack of ownership for the conflict has led to an emerging dialogue here as to whether meeting the Taliban threat with conventional military attacks will do more to incite violence than to quell it.

There is also a growing perception among educated Pakistanis that it is America's failure in Afghanistan that has pushed Pakistan into the global war on terrorism and has emboldened extremes on both sides in the process.

A poll released Wednesday by the Program on International PolicyAttitudes at the University of Maryland reflects an urban populationthat is divided on whether to send the Pakistani Army to theNorthwestern tribal areas to "pursue and capture Al-Qaeda fighters."

Yet even as a majority expresses disenchantment with the military's involvement in politics, many people still acknowledge that Pakistan depends upon that same Army to prevent retrograde religious militants from making deeper inroads into the country from their bases in the tribal territories and the more remote sections of the North West Frontier Province.

The bombing comes after intense battles in the Swat District in the Frontier Province this week, which has left more than 100 security personnel and militants dead. Once a thriving mountainous tourist town with some of the best skiing in the country, Swat and surrounding areas have, in recent weeks, become a bloody battleground.

An army of some 5,000 militants, led by Maulana Fazlullah, a local cleric notorious for his illegal radio channel on which he preaches jihad against the American-backed state, have also taken security officials hostage. Some were decapitated and their heads paraded through the streets. Pakistanis had heard of such gruesome violence in the far-flung, autonomous tribal regions, but never in "settled areas" like Swat, which are under state jurisdiction.

"People are viewing the Army's fight against terrorism as an extension of America's agenda in the region," says Khalid Rahman of the Institute for Policy Studies in Islamabad. "And the government also seems to be using this as a chance to secure its own place" at a time when its own popularity is plummeting.

Despite their apprehensions, many still say that historic negligence of the North West Frontier and tribal areas lies at the root of the problem.

"The people in these regions have never really developed faith in the system," says Asha Amirali, a political activist with the People's Rights Movement of Pakistan, an Islamabad-based social justice advocacy group. "They have lost faith in the politicians, and the judicial system at the grass roots is still impotent and disconnected from the rest of the country."

Even though Ms. Amirali, and many like her, fear what has been termed "talibanization," they also think the country is at a critical juncture, where it can be free from Army rule after eight years under President Pervez Musharraf.

The events in Swat have a haunting resonance to the confrontation in July between religious militants and security forces that resulted in the deaths of nearly 200 people at Islamabad's Red Mosque. But things were slightly different a few months ago. Then, prominent secular civil society leaders, academics, and activists had decried the militants' flaunting of the law and many in Pakistan had backed the state to take on the holdouts in the mosque compound. When the state finally did act, it left behind rumors of mass graves full of children and hostages.

"The way it was handled, it just created more hate and violence in the country," says Khurram Jamali, an investment fund manager in Karachi. Few felt much safer in the aftermath; major cities began witnessing their first suicide bombings. Mr. Fazlullah, the leader of the militant group in Swat, publicly decried the Army's operation then. Now, Mr. Jamali says, people might think twice before taking a stance. "At some level, I want the Army to act," he admits. "But I am also worried about where the battle will appear next if the violence continues."

Also See: Suicide attack in top security zone: Seven killed, 31 injured: Dawn

Justice in Balochistan?

Whither justice for Akhtar Mengal?
Sanaullah Baloch
The News, October 31, 2007

Akhtar Mengal, the son of a prominent Baloch politician, a former chief minister and the head of a moderate Baloch nationalist party, has been detained for the last eight months and is being denied justice through several delaying tactics. Illegal detention and unnecessary delays in his case have exposed the inequality and courts' inability to act without being influenced by the executive. Mengal has been arrested on charges of neither corruption, nor misuse of power. He is not an industrialist, bank defaulter and isn't involved in any land scam, like many pro-establishment politicians of the country.

Akhtar Mengal has been detained and kept in an isolated cell in a prison in Karachi since December 2006. He is facing trial for a two-hour "abduction" of two undercover agents of the security agencies. His case is being heard by an anti-terrorist court. Article 25 of the Constitution says: "All citizens are equal before law and are entitled to equal protection of law…" According to Article 5 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination: "States parties undertake to prohibit and to eliminate racial discrimination in all its forms and to guarantee the right of everyone, without distinction as to race, colour, or national or ethnic origin, to equality before the law, notably in the enjoyment of the following rights: (a) The right to equal treatment before the tribunals and all other organs administering justice…"

However, in the last five years the Baloch have not been treated according to national and international laws. Neither constitutional guarantees nor any court of law has protected their fundamental rights. Akhtar Mengal is not being tried in an open court and on the wishes of the executive he is produced in the court in a humiliating manner. Iqbal Haider, secretary general of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, witnessed the first hearing of his trial in the Karachi prison and said afterwards that Mr Mengal was brought to the courtroom and placed in an iron cage and kept away from his lawyer.

Mr Mengal and 500 other Balochistan National Party activists were arrested in November 2006 before President Musharraf's visit to Balochistan to prevent the BNP from holding a peaceful long march against the military operation, illegal arrests and forced disappearances. The BNP is a moderate political party, registered with the Election Commission and believes in a non-violent struggle for the rights of Balochistan. The party seeks political, economic and social rights for the people of the province and autonomy and control of the province's natural resources and development projects (including Gwadar port). The BNP opposes the unprecedented troop deployment and establishment of checkposts in the eastern, southern and western districts of Balochistan to exploit province's wealth and the suppression of progressive Baloch nationalists.

Mengal's family started receiving threatening phone calls as the military operation began in the province. On April 2, 2006, the Balochistan National Party held a successful rally of around 100,000 people against the military operation, forced disappearances, the establishment of military cantonments, the Gwadar port project and the exploitation of natural resources of Balochistan by the central government. According to Mr Mengal, on April 5 undercover agents of the security agencies tried to abduct his children of school-going age. He stopped his car and asked them for their identification and asked them why they were following him. They refused to give any satisfactory answer and in view of security concerns, Mr Mengal's security guards picked up the two interceptors and took them back to his residence with the intention of handing them over to the police. There, the two persons admitted that they were army personnel and almost immediately, a large number of law-enforcement agencies' personnel arrived for the release of their two comrades – which eventually happened but not after Mr Mengal's residence was besieged.

On the intervention of the Sindh chief minister, it was agreed that no case would be filed in this regard after giving servants of Mr Mengal (who 'abducted' the undercover agents for two hours) in police custody for investigation.

At some later stage, it was found that a havaldar of the Pakistan army, Qurban Hussain, filed an FIR on April 5, 2006, against Akhtar Mengal and his four servant-guards. On the other hand, when Mengal's relatives attempted to register an FIR against the law-enforcement agencies, their attempt was refused by the police. A constitutional petition (D-1917/06) was filed on Mr Mengal's behalf before the Sindh High Court requesting that an FIR should be accepted and registered. On October 13, the court restrained an anti-terrorism court hearing the case of the guards from pronouncing judgment against the four accused. Despite the fact that the restraining order was still in force, Mr Mengal's guards -- who were named in the FIR and were under arrest -- were convicted on December 9, 2006, by the court and sentenced to several years in prison and also fined Rs140,000 each.

Akhtar Mengal remained free till November 28, 2006, when the Balochistan police arrested him, along with senior members of his party and taken to Lasi farm house in Hub town, which was later declared a sub-jail. He was kept there till December 26 when his arrest was made public. He was produced before the same anti-terrorist court (which was hearing the case of his four guards) and his 14 companions were then transferred to an undisclosed location. The whereabouts of the latter currently remain unknown. Mr Mengal's father, Sardar Ataullah Mengal, has expressed the fear that the government and security agencies might kill his son. Also, it has come to light that even basic medical facilities are have been denied to him during his detention in prison.

Mr Mengal's lawyer has moved three applications; the first one seeks the provision of medical facilities, the second one demands 'B' class accommodation for his client in prison and the third one requests release on bail. The hearing of all these applications has been deferred. In one instance, the reason given for the deferment of the application for 'B' class accommodation in jail was the absence of an income tax certificate. On January 10, an income tax certificate was produced before the presiding officer but no order was passed. On the same day, senior advocate Azizullah Sheikh arrived at the Karachi Central Prison to have some papers signed by his client but he was not allowed to meet Mr Mengal. Iqbal Haider of the HRCP was also, on the same day, stopped from meeting him.

On January 19, 2007, the judge of the ATC disallowed the HRCP from observing the proceedings of the case. All proceedings of the trial are being conducted in-camera to intimidate Mengal and all other progressive Baloch politicians and prevent them from demanding socio-economic and political rights for the people of Balochistan. The HRCP secretary general has rightly said: There is no justification for holding trial inside the prison in camera and denying the presence of HRCP observers and family members of the accused at the hearing.

Repeated humiliation of the Baloch and their leaders will increase the animosity among Pakistanis. The tilted role of the judiciary and unproductive hearings of the ATC have already shattered the credibility of the bench. Rulers in Pakistan must abide by the domestic and international covenants, respect the rights of national minorities and stop intimidating and dishonouring the Baloch and their political representatives. There should be open and fair trial, which is also in the interest of the government.

The Baloch should not be discriminated against. They are part of the federation and have equal rights according to the Constitution. US civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr in a letter from jail on April 16, 1963, wrote that injustice anywhere was a threat to justice everywhere. He was right. Misuse of power and use of force against a distressed people will give birth to hate and resentment and widen the gap between the provinces and the central government.

The writer is a member of the Senate of Pakistan. Email: balochbnp@gmail.com

Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Nawaz can come back any time: Supreme Court of Pakistan

Nawaz can come back any time: SC
Says PM violated court orders; directs Punjab govt not to issue statements on Sharif’s return
By Sohail Khan: The News, October 31, 2007

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Tuesday reiterated that former prime minister Mian Nawaz Sharif can come to Pakistan any time and stressed for the implementation of its earlier judgment in letter and spirit. A seven-member larger bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry was hearing a contempt of court petition filed by the PML-N.

The Supreme Court in its historic judgment on August 23 this year had ruled that Nawaz Sharif has inalienable right to return to the country and participate in political activities with the directions that the federal and provincial governments should not hamper the safe return of the former premier.

During the hearing, the Supreme Court observed that the statements given by the foreign secretary, the chief of protocol and the chairman PIA apparently proved that the prime minister violated the court orders.

The court referred to the statement of the foreign secretary that said that he got verbal instructions from the prime minister on telephone to provide a PIA aircraft for a VVIP flight from Islamabad to Jeddah.

The court observed that it seems that from 6th of September steps were being taken by the prime minister to violate the order of the Supreme Court in this case. Attorney General of Pakistan (AG) Malik Muhammad Qayyum agreeing that no one can stop Nawaz Sharif from coming back pleaded for a short time to talk to "highest office" in the government since the allegations were very serious at which the court adjourned the hearing till November 8.

Fakharuddin G Ibrahim, the counsel for the PML-N, submitted that directions should be given to the government to arrange the return of Nawaz Sharif while, in the meantime, the court may fix the responsibility. Ibrahim said he has been told by his client that the Saudi authorities would fully comply with the court judgment.

Wasim Sajjad, representing Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, while appearing before the court submitted that the premier has highest respect for the apex court orders and he had no involvement in sending Nawaz back to Saudi Arabia on September 10.

The Supreme Court directed the highest functionaries of the Punjab government to refrain from issuing statements regarding stoppage of Nawaz Sharif's comeback as the matter is sub-judice. It observed that if the highest functionaries will not abstain from issuing such statements there will be no purpose of this court to function.

AFP adds: "The judgment passed by this court is very much intact . . . and is required to be implemented in letter and spirit," the chief justice told the Supreme Court.

"There was a clear-cut violation of our judgment."

Chaudhry asked the AG to tell him "whom should the court summon for prosecution" over the apparent contempt of court caused by Sharif's deportation.

Hundreds of Sharif's supporters clapped and shouted slogans against President General Pervez Musharraf outside the Supreme Court after the move by the chief justice.

British Thinktank accuses Saudi regime over hate literature

Thinktank accuses Saudi regime over hate literature
Matthew Weaver and agencies; Guardian Unlimited, October 30, 2007

The controversial state visit of King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, which got under way today with a lavish ceremony, has prompted new criticism over his regime's alleged role in distributing hate literature in British mosques.
The Policy Exchange thinktank found extremist literature in a quarter of the 100 mosques and Islamic institutions it visited, including London Central Mosque in Regent's Park, which is funded by Saudi Arabia.

Some of the literature advocated violent jihad, murdering gay people and stoning adulterers, its researchers found.

Most of the material is produced by agencies closely linked to the Saudi regime, according to the investigation.

The prime minister, Gordon Brown, was urged to challenge King Abdullah about the literature when he meets him tomorrow.

The government is already under pressure to raise concerns that the regime is involved in torture and other human rights abuses.

Researchers from the right-of-centre thinktank spent more than a year visiting nearly 100 Muslim religious institutions across the country, and found extremist material was available - either openly or "under the table" - in around 25.

The team collected 80 books and pamphlets, and translated the 42 that were not in English.

Extreme statements in the documents included a call for jihad against "tyrants and oppressors", which was "best done through force if possible".

Some of the publications called on British Muslims to segregrate themselves from non-Muslims, and condoned the beheading of lapsed Muslims.

The study concluded: "Saudi Arabia is the ideological source of much of this sectarianism - and must be held to account for it."

The Policy Exchange director Anthony Browne said it was "clearly intolerable" that hate literature was being "peddled" at British mosques.

"The fact that the Saudi regime is producing extremist propaganda and targeting it at British Muslims must also be challenged by our own government," he said.

"It is reassuring that the majority of mosques investigated do not propagate hate literature, but much work needs to be done to ensure that a large number of leading Islamic institutions remove this sectarianism from their midst."

King Abdullah was officially welcomed by the Queen and the prime minister at a formal greeting ceremony on Horseguards Parade, before being driven to Buckingham Palace in a state carriage.

Around 100 human rights and anti-arms trade activists shouted "Shame on you" at the Saudi ruler as he made his way along the Mall.

King Abdullah was embroiled in controversy even before his convoy of five planes touched down in London yesterday, having insisted in a BBC interview that Britain was not doing enough to tackle terrorism.

The government was forced to rebut his claims that the Saudi authorities had provided information which could have averted the July 7 attacks.

The Foreign Office has said human rights issues will not "dominate" ministerial talks with the visiting Saudi delegation.

This evening, King Abdullah will attend a banquet at the Guildhall in London, given by the Lord Mayor and Corporation of London. The Duke of York will represent the Queen at the event.

After talks at Downing Street tomorrow, the king will travel to Clarence House for a meeting with the Prince of Wales about the Prince's Trust.

On Thursday, the king will formally leave Buckingham Palace and return home.

Also see: Saudi King sharp-minded as ever: BBC

Pakistani Universities and Their Web Presence: From All Things Pakistan



From Pakistaniat.com
Pakistani Universities and Their Web Presence
Posted on October 27, 2007: Junaid Siddiqui

Last year at ATP, there was a post on the HEC (Higher Education Commission)’s Ranking of Pakistani Universities. That single post generated so much interest that in the past one year it has got 30000 hits on it. It not only shows the immense interest among prospective university students but also shows lack of career counseling or guidance available to them.

I have written this article in a hope of building further on HEC’s rankings as well as to show that Pakistani universities have very far to go to make up to any internationally recognized University Ranking.

For complete article, click here

Issues Facing Muslim Immigrants in Canada

Raza and Fatah . Reasonably accommodated
It should be a simple matter for Muslim immigrants to settle in to Canadian society: You accommodate, and we adapt
Raheel Raza and Tarek Fatah, Citizen Special; the Ottawa Citizen, October 29, 2007

Quebec needs to be thanked for initiating the debate on "reasonable accommodation." It has made it safe for members of the public to honestly express their concerns. Many Canadians find their country being turned into a large transit lounge, where people arrive, never get to know each other, simply wait to leave for different destinations in opposite directions, with little care for the transit lounge itself.

An open, honest debate about too much or too little accommodation is urgently needed in the rest of Canada. We have had enough of political correctness.

However, the Quebec Council on the Status of Women's proposal to bar public employees from wearing religious symbols while at work reflects fear and ignorance, not good judgment. The good women of Quebec have confused religion with culture. Let's face it -- much of the current ire is rooted in misgivings about ultra-conservative Muslim practices and increasingly emboldened Islamists. But whether it is Iran or Canada, the state should not be in the business of deciding what women should wear.

Face covering, female genital mutilation and honour killings should not be considered Islamic simply because some Muslims embrace them. These are tribal practices, which have unfortunately been imported into Canada. Excess cultural baggage, steeped in tradition, has no place in Canada. But why ban the hijab or the Sikh turban? There's much work to be done within the Muslim community (with full support of the mainstream) to eradicate medievalism through education, dialogue and a vigorous, no-holds-barred debate. Banning the hijab will only make this exercise more difficult.

"Reasonable accommodation" is a separate issue. Most immigrants find Canadians to be accepting and accommodating to newcomers. Our first years are difficult and scary, but ask our children and their successes speak for themselves. Of course, the cancer of racism has not been completely defeated and occasionally raises its ugly head, but by and large, new immigrants and racial minorities do better in Canada than in any other place on earth.

Contrary to this, in most Muslim countries, non-Muslims are denied equal citizenship, don't have the same freedoms we enjoy in Canada and there's little or no accommodation for their religious and cultural needs. They have to follow the law of the land, no matter how oppressive.

Muslims discover that the Canadian Charter of Rights gives them infinitely more freedoms than the lands where Islamic law is the norm. Any Muslim who has faced the wrath of religious police in Saudi Arabia, the vigilantes in Iran and rude officials in Pakistan should think twice before damning the proceedings of the Taylor-Bouchard Commission.

So why do Muslims complain when we're asked to adapt ourselves to our new home where most of us have come by choice? After all, accommodation is a two-way street -- you accommodate, we adapt.

Accommodation also places a huge responsibility on us not to make a nuisance of ourselves. Being Muslim is not only about finding a space to pray. The first words of the Koran were to "read and write" not "pray and preach." Islam is more about respect for those around us and the adoption of an impeccable integrity in our personal character rather than the parading of our costumes and the flaunting of our rituals. If my religious freedom becomes a nuisance for others, it's no longer a freedom but a burden.

So what constitutes the fine line between reasonable accommodation and unreasonable demands?

Reasonable accommodation is the multi-faith chapel at Toronto's airport, where the largest section is for Muslims. Nuisance value is the employee who insists on a separate room allocated only for her. The onus to find time and space to pray is on us, not on our teachers, employers or colleagues.

Reasonable accommodation means including Muslim books in the library. Unreasonable accommodation is the demand to ban The Three Little Pigs from schools.

Reasonable accommodation means making vegetarian or halal food available in the university cafeteria; asking for a separate restaurant is unreasonable.

Reasonable accommodation is having the freedom to wear the hijab; unreasonable accommodation is to insist on wearing face masks in public by falsely invoking Islam.

At a critical time when liberal, progressive Muslim Canadians are trying to make a dent in the dogma, it's important to let mainstream Canada know that we don't require extra accommodation; we need better accommodation for all Canadians.

For Muslims this means that instead of spending an inordinate amount of time on inane debates about the halal-ness of maple syrup, we should be engaged in a dialogue about the future of our youth, public policies, elections and the security of Canada.

Muslims are an essential part of Canadian society, whose values of secular democracy and individual freedoms are under attack by Islamists. Muslims should realize that citizenship in Canada is not based on inherited race or religion, but on a set of common laws created by men and women whom we elect and send to Parliament. Those who wish to introduce laws based on divine texts should try living in Saudi Arabia and Iran before they force the rest of us to embrace their prescription.

Raheel Raza is the author of Their Jihad ... Not My Jihad and Tarek Fatah is the author of the forthcoming book Chasing a Mirage: The Tragic Illusion of an Islamic State, to be published by John Wiley & Sons in March. They both serve on the board of the Muslim Canadian Congress.

© The Ottawa Citizen 2007

Newsweek's Controversial Title Story

COVER STORY: PAKISTAN
Where the Jihad Lives Now
Islamic militants have spread beyond their tribal bases, and have the run of an unstable, nuclear-armed nation.
Newsweek; October 29, 2007

Benazir Bhutto was worried she would not survive the day. It was, for her, to be a moment of joyous return after eight years of exile, but also an hour of great peril. Just before she left Dubai for Pakistan on Thursday, Oct. 18, Bhutto directed that a letter be hand-delivered to Pervez Musharraf, the embattled Pakistani autocrat with whom she had negotiated a tenuous political alliance. If anything happens to me, please investigate the following individuals in your government, she wrote, according to an account given to NEWSWEEK by her husband, Asif Ali Zardari. Bhutto, Pakistan's former prime minister, then proceeded to name several senior security officials she considered to be enemies, Zardari said. Principal among those she identified, according to another supporter who works for her Pakistan People's Party, was Ejaz Shah, the head of Pakistan's shadowy Intelligence Bureau, which runs domestic surveillance in somewhat the way M.I.5 does in Britain. Shah, a longtime associate of Musharraf's, is believed by Bhutto supporters to have Islamist sympathies. And Bhutto had boldly challenged Pakistan's Muslim extremists, declaring before her arrival that "the terrorists are trying to take over my country, and we have to stop them."

Bhutto was certainly prescient about the threat. On Thursday, as her motorcade inched along a parade route guarded by roughly 20,000 Pakistani security forces, one or more suicide bombers set off twin explosions that killed at least 134 bystanders and police, and injured 450 others. The bombs narrowly missed Bhutto, who had ducked into her armored truck minutes before. Shaken but uninjured, she was rushed to safety. Musharraf's government quickly fingered Baitullah Mehsud, a longtime Taliban supporter and director of some of the most lethal training facilities for suicide bombers in the far-off mountains of Waziristan. Mehsud had reportedly threatened Bhutto. She and her husband, however, pointed much closer to home. "We do not buy that it was Mehsud," Zardari told NEWSWEEK. There was no immediate evidence that Shah was connected to the bombing. At a news conference the next day, though, Bhutto noted that the streetlights had mysteriously been turned off on her parade route and said: "I am not accusing the government. I am accusing people, certain individuals who abuse their positions. Who abuse their powers."

For Complete Text, click here

Monday, October 29, 2007

Political Developments in Baluchistan - Changing Perceptions

Baloch nationalists’ dilemma
By Jamil Ahmed: Dawn, October 29, 2007

ELECTIONS appear to be round the corner as the incumbent — though powerless — assemblies are about to complete their term.

Political parties in Balochistan have started consultations to decide on suitable candidates and chalk out their election strategy. The situation in the province is, however, different from the rest of the country.

Faced with a military operation, the Baloch nationalists face a dilemma. The educated youth is radicalised and along with the defunct Baloch Liberation Army (BLA) they reject parliamentary politics, considering it to be an utter waste of time.

The Jamhoori Watan Party (JWP), Balochistan National Party (BNP-Mengal) and the National Party are the major nationalist parties which had participated in the 2002 general elections. The BNP (Awami), which had contested the polls, also claims to be a nationalist political entity but it is not recognised as such by the people. It is perceived to be close to the establishment.Nawab Khair Bakhsh Marri, who is a respected figure amongst Baloch youth and nationalist forces, has no political party of his own and has announced that he will not be a part of the election process. Serious criminal cases have been registered against Nawab Marri’s sons, with the exception of Nawabzada Jangez Marri, on charges of inciting a low level insurgency in Balochistan. Police have approached Interpol to get them arrested. Jangez Marri, the eldest son of Nawab Marri, is politically affiliated with the PML-Q. His participation in the elections cannot be ruled out.

The JWP, which had emerged as a political force on the Balochistan scene in 1990, has been split into two after the assassination of Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti in a military action in August 2006.

One faction of the party is headed by Nawabzada Brahmdagh Khan Bugti, the grandson of late Nawab Bugti, who is now leading the armed resistance. This group has announced that it will not take part in elections. The other group led by Nawabzada Talal Akbar Bugti, the son of Nawab Bugti, is not only inclined to participate in general elections but has also declared that the party would continue its struggle within the constitutional framework.

The united JWP under its founder Nawab Bugti had bagged more seats in the 1990 general elections than any other political party. But it could not form a government in the province because of the strong stand taken by Nawab Bugti when he was the chief minister of the province during Benazir Bhutto’s first term as prime minister. He had firmly stood for the rights of the Baloch, which had annoyed the establishment. The number of seats the party won steadily declined in the 1993, 1997 and the 2002 general elections.

The JWP won only four general seats in the provincial assembly and one reserved seat (for women) in 2002. Its showing inn the National Assembly was worse, with only one seat to its credit. After Nawab Bugti’s death, the JWP has been under tremendous pressure. Its members proceeded to vote for General Pervez Musharraf in the recent presidential elections.

Hence the chances of Talal Bugti’s faction winning any seat in the upcoming elections — even from Dera Bugti — are bleak. Large-scale migration has taken place from the area on account of the military operation while the opponents of Nawab Bugti are enjoying the full support of the government and its powerful agencies.

The BNP (Mengal)’s central committee decided in August to take part in the elections. Its members had resigned from the assemblies in protest against the killing of Nawab Bugti. It had been believed then that it would bid adieu to the electoral process forever and that had made the party popular with the hard-line nationalists and Baloch youth. But its popularity rating will fall with the central committee’s decision to participate in the elections.

Its patron-in-chief, veteran Baloch nationalist leader Sardar Attaullah Mengal, recently said, ‘I am convinced that the Baloch cannot achieve their objectives through parliamentary politics but if they leave the field of elections open then the rulers in Islamabad will get their own agents elected and showcase them to declare that no Baloch problem exists,’ he said. ‘The Baloch should continue their struggle on all fronts,’ he exhorted.

Though the BNP is not involved in an armed struggle it faces the brunt of the government’s wrath following its announcement of a long march from Gwadar to Quetta against the killing of Nawab Bugti and Gwadar’s mega projects. Not only has its president, Sardar Akhtar Mengal, been behind bars since last November, a large number of its leaders and workers, too, were arrested, to be released after three months under court orders. The inflexible attitude of the government towards the BNP shows that an unannounced ban has been imposed on the party because it has not been allowed to hold any political rally for the last one year.

The government and its powerful agencies are supporting Senator Mir Muhammad Naseer Mengal, the federal state minister for petroleum and natural resources, in the Khuzdar area, the JWP stronghold. The senator is a staunch rival of the party in Dera Bugti.

The National Party has so far not faced any challenge from the government. However, the BNP (Awami), an ally of the ruling PML, enjoys the support of the government in Mekran and other parts of the province which are the strongholds of the National Party.

The defunct BLA has urged Baloch nationalist forces to keep themselves away from the poll process, as, according to the banned outfit, participation would harm the Baloch nationalist struggle. All Baloch nationalist parties have not paid serious heed to this advice. They are in trouble because of the military operation, the opposition of the Baloch youth to elections and the support of the government for their opponents.

Keeping in view this situation, some political observers are of the view that Baloch nationalist parties would never find a level playing field in the next elections. There are far too many hurdles of the government’s making.Understanding the gravity of the situation, the Baloch nationalists are now stressing the need for an electoral alliance. Former governor of Balochistan, Lt Gen (retd) Abdul Qadir Baloch, is now trying to rally the Baloch nationalists around one electoral alliance. He met Sardar Ataullah Mengal and leaders of the National Party with this aim.

Sardar Ataullah Mengal has admitted that the former governor met him and urged the nationalist forces to contest elections jointly. ‘Baloch nationalists should contest elections from a single platform and show the world that they are the real representatives of the Baloch by obtaining over 50 per cent votes,’ he said.

The National Party has constituted a six-member committee, headed by Dr Abdul Hayee Baloch, to form an electoral alliance with other political parties, particularly those with nationalist leanings. It is to be seen whether the nationalist parties will actually go in for an election alliance. Without an electoral arrangement they could find themselves in deep waters in the next elections.

No Evidence that Iran is Developing Nuclear Weapons: IAEA Chief

Concern Raised About Anti-Iran Rhetoric
Guardian, October 28, 2007

WASHINGTON (AP) - The head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog said Sunday he had no evidence Iran was working actively to build nuclear weapons and expressed concern that escalating rhetoric from the U.S. could bring disaster.

``We have information that there has been maybe some studies about possible weaponization,'' said Mohamed ElBaradei, who leads the International Atomic Energy Agency. ``That's why we have said that we cannot give Iran a pass right now, because there is still a lot of question marks.''

``But have we seen Iran having the nuclear material that can readily be used into a weapon? No. Have we seen an active weaponization program? No.'' Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice accused Iran this month of ``lying'' about the aim of its nuclear program. She said there is no doubt Tehran wants the capability to produce nuclear weapons and has deceived the IAEA about its intentions.

Vice President Dick Cheney has raised the prospect of ``serious consequences'' if Iran were found to be working toward developing a nuclear weapon. Last week, the Bush administration announced harsh penalties against the Iranian military and state-owned banking systems in hopes of raising pressure on the world financial system to cut ties with Tehran.

ElBaradei said he was worried about the growing rhetoric from the U.S., which he noted focused on Iran's alleged intentions to build a nuclear weapon rather than evidence the country was actively doing so. If there is actual evidence, ElBaradei said he would welcome seeing it.

``I'm very much concerned about confrontation, building confrontation, because that would lead absolutely to a disaster. I see no military solution. The only durable solution is through negotiation and inspection,'' he said.

``My fear is that if we continue to escalate from both sides that we will end up into a precipice, we will end up into an abyss. As I said, the Middle East is in a total mess, to say the least. And we cannot add fuel to the fire,'' ElBaradei added.

Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, agreed that the current ``hot rhetoric'' from the U.S. could prove dangerous.

``We ought to make it clear that there's always a military option if Iran goes nuclear, but that we ought to just speak more softly because these hot words that are coming out of the administration, this hot rhetoric plays right into the hands of the fanatics in Iran,'' said Levin, D-Mich.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said strong action might be needed because he does not believe the United Nations adequately has kept Iran in check.

``I think the United Nations' efforts to sanction Iran have been pitiful because of Russia and China vetoing a resolution. The European Union has some sanctions. They're fairly weak.''

``So in this regard, I agree with the following, that the diplomatic efforts to control Iran need to continue. They need to be more robust but we're sending mixed signals,'' Graham said.

ElBaradei spoke on CNN's ``Late Edition,'' and Levin and Graham appeared on CBS' ``Face the Nation.''

Pakistan Hires another Lobbying firm in the US - Making a Poor Country Poorer

Pakistan hires another lobbyist in Washington
* Former assistant secretary of state for South Asia to represent Pakistan for $1.2m
* Lobbying contract has a year’s validity
By Khalid Hasan: Daily Times, October 29, 2007

Washington: Pakistan has got itself yet another lobbyist at a yearly cost of $1.2 million, which brings the number of those it has been using to sell itself on Capitol Hill and in the corridors of the government to two, though there could be more.

The other firm representing Pakistan here is Van Scoyoc Associates, which is paid $55,000 a month. “We continue to represent the embassy and work with the ambassador and his team on a daily basis,” according to Mark Talvarides, vice president for Van Scoyoc and lead lobbyist on the contract.

Pakistan’s representative:The new lobbyist for Pakistan is a firm called Cassidy and Associates, and the person who would be carrying Pakistan’s flag will be former assistant secretary of state for South Asia, Robin Raphael. Raphael, who retired from the foreign service a few years ago, earned the permanent ire of the Indian government and the Indian-American community for questioning the authenticity of the instrument of accession allegedly signed by Maharaja Hari Singh, which, India maintains, put the seal of approval on the state’s accession to India. That is a position accepted neither by Pakistan nor the people of Kashmir, nor the United Nations for that matter. This correspondent was present at the press conference where the erstwhile assistant secretary made her observation, which caused an uproar in India. She was instructed never to repeat that bit again and she did not. The only other government Cassidy works for is Eqatorial Guinea

Year-long contract: According to records filed with the Justice Department, the contract with Pakistan has a year’s validity. However, other things being equal, there is every likelihood of its being renewed. Cassidy’s work will involve lobbying and public relations campaigns promoting Pakistan’s status as an “important strategic partner of the US”, according to The Hill, a small publication devoted to congressional coverage.

Mumtaz Zahra Baloch, fist secretary at the Pakistan embassy, told The Hill, “We thought we had some challenging issues and we thought we should add another lobbying firm.” Robin Raphel, who is also senior vice president at Cassidy, stressed Pakistan’s necessity as an ally for the American counter-terrorism strategy. “We need to recognise it is not easy what Pakistan is trying to do here in assisting us in the fight against the terrorism in the region,” she said. She said her job would be to make sure “all relevant parties have the facts”, adding, “I think it’s clear there is a less than perfect understanding of Pakistan here.”

Benazir Bhutto’s Pakistan People’s Party is represented by BKSH and Associates and its affiliate Burson-Marsteller LLC to promote fair elections in Pakistan. Pakistan Embassy first secretary Baloch told The Hill, “We believe there is common ground between her party and the government.”

Sunday, October 28, 2007

Justice - A new rallying cry in Pakistan


Picture: Imran Khan, founder of the Pakistan Justice Party, speaks at an October anti-government rally in Pakistan. (Getty Images)

A new rallying cry
Why the concept of justice - not freedom, not democracy - is becoming a potent tool for political reform in the Muslim world
By Shahan Mufti | October 28, 2007: Boston globe

PAKISTANIS ARE USING the Urdu word zulm a lot these days. The twin suicide bombings last week in the port city of Karachi that left hundreds injured and dead were zulm. So is a deal between political rivals that left millions of dollars stolen from the state unaccounted for. The Pakistan Army's continuing military assault on the tribal areas is being termed zulm. The bombing of girls' schools by Taliban militants in the same tribal belt along the Afghan border, the US military's operation in Iraq - all zulm.

The word signifies severe cruelty or injustice. The Arabic root implies doing wrong, and is used in the Koran as the most basic reference to sin. Zalimeen are sinners who commit zulm. Allah does not guide them, it says in the holy book - their abode is a fiery hell. In Pakistan, a country caught in the middle of several wars, the words are read in the press and heard on TV and in tea-stalls on street sides every day. There is much zulm in the world today, and many zalimeen on all sides.

The antithesis of zulm is adl, the Koranic word for justice, and insaf, the Persian equivalent. The demand for adl-o-insaf, for justice, has emerged as a compelling rallying call in Pakistan. It has become a vital tenet of the nationalists and of Islamist party rhetoric, it is built into the spirit of the civil society movement for democracy led by lawyers and championed by Supreme Court judges, and it is the platform for the Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaf, or Pakistan Justice Party, a political party led by Imran Khan, a onetime cricket star.

In many postcolonial Muslim states, a new call for justice is catalyzing a process of transformation. Political fronts with Islamist roots and leanings based on justice are making rapid inroads to power from Indonesia to Kosovo, from Morocco and Turkey to the Maldives. The concept of justice has sparked a new conversation between Islam and governance in these countries, creating a third way that recognizes the universal notions of freedom and equity yet casts them in an indigenous, sometimes explicitly Islamic light. It is a potent political formula that appeals to economically depressed classes by addressing issues of social injustice while also drawing in the growing middle classes, who are frustrated with rampant corruption in their countries.

The call for justice is striking a chord with broad swaths of the Pakistani public: with the religious who hear the divine in it, with the secular and urban educated who are frustrated by the blatant corruption in bureaucracy and government, and with the country's economically depressed majority.

"We are living in a society where the strong are crushing the weak, where an avarice elite has become a parasite on us all," said Khan, sitting in his sparsely furnished, bare-walled office at the party headquarters in Islamabad. "A system based on justice would liberate the people, give them true freedom, and unleash their real potential."

Western rhetoric - concepts such as freedom, democracy, and liberty - are being rejected in favor of the more incontrovertible "justice." The West's efforts are often dismissed as insincere, but it matters little, since concepts such as democracy and freedom are often partly lost in translation. In many cultures, freedom is incomplete without responsibilities. Some orthodox religious scholars might even argue that true freedom is found only in the complete submission to the will of Allah - a far cry from how the concept is appreciated in the West.

In Pakistan, the movement for justice has the potential to redefine the discourse of religion and politics. Come the elections in January, it could emerge as a powerful contender for power. In the second largest Muslim country in the world, which has been struggling to reconcile its secular foundation and Muslim identity since its creation, some are hoping that this new movement could cure a decades-old political schizophrenia that has brought chronic instability. And, of course, it could also pull Islamist politics, which has always tended toward extreme rhetoric and militancy, closer to the mainstream.

At a time when Pakistan has become a front-line state in the "war on terror," the United States is throwing its chips in with Pervez Musharraf. It hopes the "moderate," pro-American leader will be able to keep a lid on what seems like a country on the tipping point of change. But by supporting the general, American policy is suffocating a robust and eclectic opposition movement - Khan's movement, elements within the Islamist coalition, nationalists, a growing secular civil society movement led by lawyers in their black suit and ties - based on justice.

"Americans," Khan warned in a recent newspaper column, "are pushing people who are in favor of democracy at the moment towards extremism."

. . .

Justice has long been an important element of classical Islamic social and political thought. Two of the 99 qualities of Allah described in the Koran are al-Adl, "the just," and al-Muqsit, "the most equitable." Words with the root a-d-l are used dozens of times in the book, most often in reference to establishing social order. At one place the Koran instructs: "And let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just: that is next to piety."

In Muslim countries the political emphasis on justice has traditionally been garbed in calls for social welfare and focused on social inequities. The pro-West Justice and Development Party of Turkey, which holds power in both the Legislature and the executive branch, is an offshoot of Necmettin Erbakan's Islamist Refah Partisi (Welfare Party) established in 1983. In a country in which the separation of religion and politics was militantly guarded, the Welfare Party cloaked its Islamist ethos in the call for Adil Duzen, or "Just Order."

Similarly, the Justice and Development Party of Morocco is the only legal Islamist party in the country and forms the main political opposition, having secured 46 parliamentary seats compared with the winning party's 52 in this year's election. Its leader, Saad Eddin Al Othmani, fashions the party along the lines of the Christian Democrats in Europe and claims that "efforts, such as combating bribery and corruption, are based in sharia." The Islamist Prosperous Justice Party in Indonesia, the largest Muslim country in the world, is now a major political force, working off a strong anticorruption platform.

Imran Khan was a newcomer to politics when he founded the Pakistan Justice Party in 1996, but he was hardly an unknown. After studying politics, philosophy, and economics at Oxford alongside political rival Benazir Bhutto, he embarked on an illustrious sports career. He was captain of the Pakistan cricket team that brought home the World Cup in 1992, becoming a minor deity in a country in which the sport might as well be a religion. His rugged good looks and larger-than-life persona made him a global heartthrob and to this day he is haunted in his political career by allusions to his "playboy" past. Many never really forgave him for marrying British heiress Jemima Goldsmith. (Khan and Goldsmith have two children, and were divorced in 2004.)

After retiring from cricket, Khan wrote a book on the tribal areas of Pakistan (he is of tribal Pashtun decent). When his mother succumbed to cancer, he raised funds to establish Pakistan's first and largest cancer hospital, which provides free cancer treatment to the poor. Only after carrying out the largest fund-raising campaign in the country's history did he decide to enter the political arena.

The Justice Party's manifesto includes detailed reform proposals for every institution of the state - an anomaly in a country in which slogans and cults of personality are usually enough to rise to power. But the cornerstone of the Justice Party is the establishment of an independent judiciary. This alone can begin to cure Pakistan in profound ways, the party states, by keeping its rulers in check.

. . .

Initially, Khan's call for establishing a free and independent judiciary found little popular support. But this year, things started to change when on March 9, Musharraf attempted to remove the chief justice of Pakistan to clear his path to a reelection. The activist judge had earned a reputation as being pro-poor and had aggressively prosecuted corruption, embarrassing Musharraf. But Musharraf's move backfired; public rallies attracted antigovernment crowds of the kind that hadn't been witnessed in the general's eight-year rule.

"After 9th of March people began to understand what it means to have an independent judicial system," Khan told a private television channel recently. "Eventually, if the civil society and the political forces stand behind an independent judiciary, you will have a revolution in Pakistan."

Khan is now contesting a political deal between Musharraf and Bhutto in the Supreme Court, which granted the ex-prime minister amnesty from charges of stealing millions of dollars from the state and allowed her to return from exile this month. The country, he says, is struggling to shake off a feudal system in which the government bureaucracy attracts only two kinds of people: those who want to get involved in crime and those who are already criminals and need protection.

The young Justice Party holds only one seat in the Legislature. But Khan has built alliances with the lawyers' street movements, some prominent Islamist leaders, and the nationalist Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz), which has twice swept elections in Pakistan. When the elections come in January, he has high hopes for his party - and, more importantly, for the idea of justice behind it.

"It's not something particular to Islam or even Pakistan," he says. "It's the basis of every civilized society."

Shahan Mufti is a freelance writer based in Islamabad.

Saturday, October 27, 2007

How to resurrect the pro-democracy movement in Pakistan?

Still time for a salvage mission
By Ayaz Amir: Dawn, October 26, 2007

THE anti-Musharraf movement in full bloom this summer has passed. The opposition parties fluffed it or our stars were not in the right conjunction. We have entered a new phase in our political life, calling for a shift in strategy and a new order of battle.

No army general in power has ever been removed by a popular upsurge in Pakistan. Ayub Khan, self-appointed field marshal for wars unknown, does not count. He was not army chief when he faced a popular uprising. Yahya was the army chief who conspired against him to engineer his ouster.

When the wheel turned for Yahya he went because of defeat in East Pakistan. Zia was blown out of the skies. But before that his power was diminished after the 1985 elections when Mohammad Khan Junejo became prime minister.

Gen Pervez Musharraf has arrived at the same twilight zone in his presidency. As long as he enjoys the army’s backing he will remain in power. But he faces a general election and there is pressure on him from Washington to cut a power-sharing deal with Benazir Bhutto, which makes her (paradoxical as it may sound) his possible Mohammad Khan Junejo.

Admittedly, there is much cynicism around and the political parties are falling back into their traditional mode of mutual vituperation and mudslinging. But if they are not to make a hash of things again, if they are not to play the mutually destructive game Musharraf and his coterie would like them to play, they have to be realistic and see what the possibilities for expanding democracy are in the current situation.

Benazir Bhutto must know that Washington may have brought her back to Pakistan but Washington cannot fix the coming elections for her. The powers-that-be — under which rubric fall Musharraf, Q League president Chaudhry Shujaat, Punjab chief minister Pervaiz Elahi, Sindh chief minister Arbab Rahim, and all those who are congenitally averse to a PPP comeback — will do all in their power to ensure that the PPP is cut down to size.

A PPP majority in the elections may be Washington’s heartfelt desire. It doesn’t suit Musharraf or his allies. Benazir can come close to winning the elections only if she has the support of other opposition parties, principally Nawaz Sharif’s PML-N.

Simply unbelievable, isn’t it? The N League supporting the PPP? But what options does Nawaz Sharif have? He can rave from the sidelines and see his party repeat its lacklustre performance in the 2002 elections or he can play a subtler game not by entering into an open alliance with Benazir Bhutto — because the establishment won’t allow it — but a seat-adjustment formula at the district level.

Not a national alliance with drums beating and flags flying because that would scare Musharraf’s inner circle out of its wits but loose seat-winning alliances across the country — the PML-N supporting the PPP where it is strong, the PPP backing the PML-N where it is the other way round. Baloch nationalists can be a part of this arrangement as can the ANP. This is the only way to beard the lion in his den, the only way to get a pro-democracy majority in the next National Assembly.

The obstacles along this path are formidable but they are mostly in the mind, a mix of mistrust and prejudice lingering from an era long since over. The Alliance for Democracy may have fallen apart and Benazir may have cut a deal with Musharraf but Pakistan’s political landscape today is not what it was in the 1990s when the PPP and PML-N were at each other’s throats. Today their enemies are different, putting them under the necessity of looking for new friends.

Who are the persons most upset by Benazir’s homecoming? The Chaudhries in Punjab and Arbab Rahim in Sindh who see their position as Musharraf’s leading political guns threatened. The MQM is not afraid of Benazir because it is sure of its popular base in Karachi and Hyderabad. The Chaudhries and Arbab are not similarly confident because their power is contrived, a gift from Musharraf and his camarilla.

Shujaat thinks he is the regime’s Cardinal Richelieu, the power behind the throne. Pervaiz Elahi, not satisfied with the satrapy of Punjab (which is more than half of Pakistan), has dreams of becoming prime minister. That is why he is running a private election campaign, and has been doing so for some time, so as to make his run for the prime ministership unstoppable. Son Moonis is standing for MNA from Lahore. Hoardings there proclaim him ‘Pride of Lahore’, doubtless proving that there is no end to our talent for grim humour.

Who are Nawaz Sharif’s deadliest political rivals? Not the PPP for times have changed but Shujaat and Pervaiz Elahi. Doesn’t this point to a convergence of interests between Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto? Don’t both share a common interest in reducing the power of the two Chaudhries?

In Rawalpindi, for instance, the PPP and the PML-N share an interest in putting a zip on the biggest lip in Pakistani politics, Sheikh Rashid. They won’t succeed unless they field a common candidate against him.

Musharraf can’t be assaulted frontally. He presents too strong a line of defence for that. But whether in love or war a frontal assault is seldom the best policy. That is why down the ages the best captains of war have favoured the indirect approach: rolling an enemy’s flanks or taking him from the rear. So if Musharraf is not to be assaulted frontally, the next best thing is to whittle away at his satellites in the Q League.

Both parties should put up a single candidate against Moonis in Lahore and against the Chaudhries in Gujrat, and so on. As the elections approach, my reckoning is that voices from the grassroots calling for a seat-to-seat adjustment between these two major parties will grow louder.

The holy fathers (of the MMA) are sincere only to themselves. Only a fool will trust them. Any party taking them on board is likely to find it an unwelcome bargain in the end. They should be left to stew in their own juice. Indeed, no outcome should be more welcome than for Maulana Fazlur Rehman to be hoisted on the petard of his own cleverness.

But for Imran Khan and others of his ilk to train all their guns at Benazir Bhutto is to bark up the wrong tree. There will be a time and place for opposing the Daughter of the East. But that is not yet because today’s problems are different.

The last thing anyone should want is for Musharraf to cast himself in the mould of a Suharto or a Hosni Mubarak. That will be the end, giving rise to a level of frustration and despair we won’t know how to eliminate. No, we must look to safer alternatives.

Benazir is the camel who with American help has entered the Bedouin’s tent. It is in the national interest to see that the camel occupies more space, leaving progressively less space for the Bedouin. But for that to happen, our political parties will have to chuck the baggage of the past and leave their adolescence behind.

So why not cool down the overheated rhetoric regarding deals, betrayal of ideals and the dry-cleaning of corruption? Let us concentrate on essentials, on first things first. Let’s see Musharraf getting out of uniform and the Chaudhries confined to Gujrat where they belong. The long march to idealism and high principles can be resumed later.

Who is responsible for this turn of events?

Militants behead law-enforcement men in public
By Hameedullah Khan; Dawn, October 27, 2007

SWAT, Oct 26: Militants on Friday publicly executed four law-enforcement personnel in a village, 16km west of Mingora, the district headquarters, and exchanged heavy gunfire with security forces in a nearby sub-district.

“It was gruesome,” was how a resident of Shakkardarra described the scene of beheading of the law-enforcement personnel.Requesting anonymity, he told Dawn on phone that masked militants armed with rocket-propelled grenades and assault rifles brought the four men to the village at around 5pm, fires a few shots in the air and then beheaded them.

The men, said to be in their mid-20s, had their hands tied together. They were pushed to the ground on the main Matta-Mingora road and had their heads chopped off.

“Let this serves as a warning to all those who spy for the government or help the government. All sons of Bush will meet similar fate,” the resident quoted one of the militants announcing shortly before the execution.

“We watched the gory scene in shock and horror. We felt so helpless. There was fear and gloom in the village,” he said.

There was no information about the identity of the beheaded men. Locals said that two of them were from police and from the haircut and the sandals of the other two it appeared that they belonged to a paramilitary force.

“The bodies are still lying on the road and militants are standing nearby,” he said.

Military Spokesman Maj-Gen Waheed Arshad denied that any paramilitary personnel was missing or had been killed.

However, NWFP Home Secretary Badshah Gul Wazir said at a news briefing in the evening that three Frontier Constabulary personnel and one policeman, who had been kidnapped by militants from Sambat and Baryan in Matta sub-district earlier in the day, were ‘reported’ to have been executed.He said two civilians had been killed and another wounded in a crossfire between militants and security forces in Imam Dheri, the village of Maulana Fazlullah.

He denied reports that the government had launched any operation and said that militants in the village had fired on troops who were patrolling the area.

People in Shakkardarra said that militants of Jaish-i-Muhammad, who had set up checkposts on the main road and took positions on hills, seized the four men during the checking of vehicles.

No group has so far claimed responsibility for the execution, but Maulana Naddar, a lieutenant of Maulana Fazlullah, said in a broadcast on an FM radio that the men had been executed to avenge the death of three militants killed early in the day.

Earlier, security forces and militants holding positions on the two sides of the Swat river exchanged heavy gunfire.

The military spokesman said that army troops deployed in the troubled region were not being used in the area. However, local people claimed that mortar shells were fired as gunship helicopters hovered over the area.

Maulana Fazlullah, son-in-law of incarcerated leader of Maulana Sufi Mohammad, is reported to have gone underground. It is said that he is trying to garner support from the nearby district of Kohistan.

Local people said that paramilitary forces had occupied a militant training camp located in the mountains of Shah Dagai in the Khwazakhela sub-district.

Meanwhile, the NWFP cabinet met in Peshawar to discuss the situation.

Agencies add: The home secretary said that militants fired rockets at a chopper carrying IGFC Maj-Gen Mohammad Alam Khattak who had come to inspect troops deployed in the Fizza Ghat area.Military spokesman Waheed Arshad said: “The clash erupted after militants fired at paramilitary forces setting up checkposts; the forces retaliated and asked for helicopter cover. “We provided them with surveillance and gunship helicopters to give cover to fighting troops.”

Conspirators & Rioters: Gujrat Violence in India


Conspirators & Rioters: A Cold Eclipse
ASHISH KHETAN

There were the cool strategists — leaders, officials, ideologues. And then there were the foot soldiers, who raped, killed and looted. The genocide was clinical
Tehlaqa.com: Nov 3, 2007

THERE WAS no spontaneity to what happened in Gujarat post- Godhra. This was no uncontrived, unplanned, unprompted communal violence. This was a pogrom. This was genocide.

In a planned, coldly strategic manner, Muslim neighbourhoods across both urban and rural Gujarat were targeted. Large sections of Hindus were united under a single objective: to kill Muslims, wherever and by whatever means, preferably by first stabbing and mutilating them, and then by setting on fire what remained, whether dead or alive. During the course of the TEHELKA sting, many accused said they preferred burning Muslims alive over other forms of death since cremation is considered unacceptable in Islam.

For three days after the February 27 fire on the Sabarmati Express at Godhra, Gujarat’s BJP government receded from public view and let the armed mercenaries of Hindu organisations take over. For three days, absolute anarchy reigned. Execution squads were formed, composed of the dedicated cadre of Hindu organisations — the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, the Bajrang Dal, the Kisan Sangh, the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad and the Bharatiya Janata Party. Masjids and dargahs were destroyed across the state. Seventy-three Muslim religious places were torched in Ahmedabad alone, 55 in Sabarkantha, 22 in Vadodara.

The architects of Gujarat’s greatest shame were of two sorts. There were the coolheaded strategists, the conspirators, who plotted the carnage from behind the scenes. And there were the foot soldiers, the members of the saffron army, drugged on the vicious agenda of so-called Hindutva, who went out and looted, raped and killed. On occasion, the planners were also sometimes emboldened to go out and participate in the massacres.

Overview
First-hand accounts from the men who plotted and executed the genocide in Ahmedabad, Vadodara and Sabarkantha. Mayhem was meticulously planned and carried out by VHP-Bajrang Dal cadres across Muslim localities.

NARENDRA MODI visited Godhra on the day of the burning of coach S-6 of the Sabarmati Express. His outburst provided the first sign to Sangh workers that the time to corner the Muslims had come

THAT VERY NIGHT, top BJP and Sangh leaders met at Ahmedabad, Vadodara and Godhra, and gave the green signal for an all-out assault on Muslims across the state

A STRATEGY was devised on how to shield the attackers from the law after the riots. Prominent lawyers were briefed and senior police officers taken into confidence. The cadres were told Modi was squarely behind them

THE MOBILISATION of the under castes, something the Sangh had been engaged in for years, dovetailed into the deep penetration Hindutva already had among Gujarat’s higher castes. Godhra provided the perfect spark to fuse them together

FROM THE very outset, the police played partisan, often joining the mobs. Officers who tried to do their duty found their hands tied. The complicity was led by then Ahmedabad Commissioner PC Pandey, who ensured compliance by a swathe of junior officers

WEAPONS, FROM BOMBS to guns to trishuls, were either manufactured and distributed by Sangh workers themselves, or smuggled through Sangh channels from all over India. The Bajrang Dal and the VHP already had a large cache of firearms and daggers

BJP AND SANGH LEADERS led the bloodthirsty mobs through Ahmedabad’s bylanes, Sabarkantha’s villages, Vadodara’s localities. The police stood guard to the mayhem

BJP MLA MAYABEN KODNANI drove around Ahmedabad’s Naroda locality all day, directing the mobs. VHP leaders Atul Vaid and Bharat Teli did the same at the Gulbarg Housing Society. None of them ever went to jail

FIRE WAS THE MOST FAVOURED weapon in the rioters’ hands. That cremation is considered un-Islamic fuelled their frenzy to burn. Petrol and kerosene were lavishly used, as were the victims’ own gas cylinders

BABU BAJRANGI reveals he collected 23 revolvers from Hindus in Naroda Patiya. He called VHP general secretary Jaideep Patel 11 times and informed Gordhan Zadaphia, the then minister of state for home, about the death toll

GOVERNMENT COUNSEL before the Nanavati-Shah Commission, Arvind Pandya, himself worships Modi and describes Justice Shah as “our man”. Nanavati’s own report on the 1984 anti-Sikh riots is gathering dust till today

For complete Report, click here

Swat Operation - How People in NWFP are reacting to the developments

NWFP citizens voice support for Swat military operation
Daily Times, October 27, 2007

* Many hold Fazlullah responsible for military operation, but also blame federal and NWFP governments for not taking timely action against radicals

By Akhtar Amin

PESHAWAR: A large number of people across the Northwest Frontier Province voiced support for the military operation in Swat. They said the government had no option but to take action against growing militancy, perpetual attacks on public property and security forces.

“We are not upset about the operation against militants. They challenged the government’s writ and have been trying to establish a parallel government through violence and harassment,” said Jan Mohammad, a Peshawar resident told Daily Times.

He criticised renegade cleric Maulana Fazlullah for going underground to protect himself while leaving innocent people to face the military operation. “The Maulana is definitely responsible for the casualties in the Swat military operation,” he said.

Jan did, however, urge the government to avoid civilian casualties. “The government will face stiff resistance if it targets innocent civilians during the operation,” he said.

Gul Rehman, a bearded 58-year-old bakery owner in Peshawar, also voiced support for the military operation against what he termed “Islamist militants” in Swat valley.

Swat was the most scenic and peaceful area in the country, but turned into a terrorist den within a year, he said. “Had the Muthahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) government taken timely action against the radical elements in Swat, this would not have happened.”

Farman Ali, a taxi driver in Mardan, blamed the government for the deteriorating law and order situation. “As with the Lal Masjid, the government, and in this case also the MMA-led NWFP government, allowed radicals to challenge the writ of the state, and then started a military operation against them.” He questioned the MMA leaders’ silence over the Swat operation. “Where is the MMA’s street power to protest the military operation?” he asked.

The MMA would try to use the Swat operation to gain political mileage in the upcoming elections, he added.

Amir Rehman, resident of Mingora city in Swat district, told Daily Times that Swat residents were also calm during Friday’s crossfire between Fazlullah’s followers and security forces in the Imamdheri area. “Swat residents are fed up with the cleric’s rule in the name of Shariah, and the attacks on commercial markets,” he said.

Mohammad Ali of Nowshera district said the operation against pro-Taliban militants was the need of the hour. However, he also suspected the role of intelligence agencies in the build-up of radicals and the subsequent military operation in Swat.

Mohammad Zamin of Charsadda said Swat would not have seen the prevailing state of affairs had the MMA government taken timely action against Fazlullah and activists of the defunct Tehrik-e-Nifaz-Shariat-e-Muhammadi. However, he accused pro-Taliban militants of destroying Swat’s tourism industry and creating havoc in the area.

According to NWFP Home Secretary Badshah Gul Wazir, Fazlullah has the support of 5,000 fighters in 59 Swat villages. He said the Fazlullah had formed his own force, known as the Shaheen Commando Force, comprising over 400 armed fighters who had been patrolling various areas in Swat.

Wazir said 18 security personnel were killed in the blast on Thursday, and overall, 63 security personnel had died while 140 had been injured during various militant attacks in Swat during the past 10 months.

Swat, with a population of over 1.2 million, witnessed an operation by paramilitary forces in 1994-95, when the Frontier Corps, led by Major General Fazal Ghafoor, seized madrassas from the leader of the now defunct TNSM, Maulana Sufi Mohammad – Maulana Fazlullah’s father-in-law. Sufi Mohammad has been imprisoned at the Dera Ismail Khan Prison for the last six years on charges of taking around 10,000 jihadis from Pakistan to Afghanistan to fight alongside the Taliban against US-led coalition forces and the Northern Alliance.

Hundreds flee as ‘operation’ launched in Swat: Daily Times, October 27, 2007

Friday, October 26, 2007

Unravelling the Pakistani Elite

VIEW: Unravelling the Elite — Saleem H Ali
Daily Times, October 27, 2007

A few weeks ago, I met an award-winning New York Times writer, who has written numerous news stories about Pakistan. As we started a conversation about Pakistan’s politics, he remarked that he had many friends there and I’d probably know them since everyone seems to know everyone in the ‘elite circles of South Asia’.

While there is indeed some truth n this statement, I also felt a bit slighted to be lumped with the “elite”, implying perhaps a less-than-deserved career-trajectory on an inflated cushion of prestige.

My immediate response was that I was not one of the elite, despite my professorial credentials. That my father grew up in abject poverty near Bhati Gate and was the first in his family to attend college. Not too long ago, I had also conversed with award-winning Pakistani filmmaker Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy who takes pride in mentioning that she is the first woman in her family to have attended college.

It is a refreshing indication of our times that privilege is no longer an indelible mark of merit and individuals can take pride in their humble origins. However, in the larger context of global society, family names and ranks still mean far too much and it is hard for us to escape the allure of celebrity which in the case of Pakistan is often associated with land and business holdings. Life is still much easier if your last name belongs to one of the elite families. One of my old friends from Aitchison changed his surname to his mother’s family name since it would potentially help him with political aspirations.

We were reminded of the power of names last week with the momentous return of Benazir Bhutto. While she and other women leaders such as Khalida Zia are often heralded as examples of Muslim emancipation, they cannot escape their lineage and elite branding. Would they have managed to rise to the top of a patriarchal society purely on the basis of merit? Probably not, but that should still not detract us from acknowledging their aptitude and potential for leadership.

Yet if Ms Bhutto and many other feudal politicians are truly committed to pluralistic democracy and shedding their elite baggage, they will have to first consider a more equitable distribution of their land base. This should not be caricatured as a call towards old-world socialism but rather a levelling of the marketplace in land tenure that benefits all, and once and for all dispenses the shackles of feudalism that have paralysed our democratic growth.

As a starting point, all politicians should commit themselves to a comprehensive land reform law that will provide a stable resource base for those who toil tirelessly in our fields. The matter is particularly acute in Southern Punjab where feudalism is most acutely entrenched and where we have also seen a rise in extremism.

Some of the arrests in the recent suicide bombing have also been linked to this area and we are left to wonder how discontent with the elite is now finally beginning to take its toll. If we turn our eyes to Swat, we see the roots of much discontentment also with the old, elite families of the valley who were once unquestionably revered but are now quite emphatically reviled. It is in such inequality that extremist elements take easy roots.

The power of the elite is also pervasive in other parts of the world. Most notably, the Bush family in the United States has managed to pave the way to success for even their most mediocre progeny by getting them admitted to prestigious schools and universities and gaining access to networks of influence.

In the United Kingdom, feudalism is still pervasive, particularly in Scotland where 90% of the land is owned by 1% of the population. However, market forces are at least allowing for the transition towards more equity to occur with the land base. The lords and ladies are no longer able to afford the management of these huge tracts of land because the political support to subsidise their holdings has vanished.

The poor crofters who used to work on the land herding sheep have in many cases moved to other professions, leaving the aristocracy with little else to do but donate their land holdings. In many case the beneficiaries have been environmental land trusts or tourism businesses.

If such market forces were ever to come about in Pakistan, the beneficiaries most likely should be village land councils with carefully monitored profit allocation mechanisms for the community. India was able to have meaningful land redistribution and I am confident that if we really put our minds to the matter, we can do the same.

Yet, leadership for this must come from the feudal politicians themselves who are so successful in galvanising their minions for rallies. While some level of inequality is perhaps a metric of differential human aptitude, the flagrant feudalism in our country and elsewhere is a sign of differential human apathy. Let’s use this week of sombre reflection in the aftermath of the tragedy in Karachi to consider the structural causes of blind political fervour that marked and marred the celebrations on October 18, 2007.

Battle at TNSM's Stronghold in Swat

Battle at Pakistan Cleric’s Stronghold
By ISMAIL KHANNew York Times, October 26, 2007

PESHAWAR, Pakistan, Oct. 26 — Pakistani security forces exchanged heavy gunfire with militants at the sprawling seminary of an increasingly powerful extremist cleric in the troubled North-West Frontier Province today, according to regional police officials.

The fighting was in the same region where a bomb attack on Thursday killed 17 members of a civil armed guard and 3 civilians.

The cleric, Maulana Fazlullah, is also known as Maulana Radio for his illegal radio broadcasts urging Taliban-style Islamic law. The provincial government deployed 2,500 troops to the area, known as Swat, two days ago, to join army forces trying to quell the rise of extremism the cleric has fostered. He is believed to have gone underground since the troops arrived.

Swat, once a peaceful tourist area, has been transformed in the past few months by a series of deadly bombings that have been aimed at civilians. The cleric is believed to have 4,500 armed followers.

The fighting today was in a subdistrict of northern Swat, called Kabal.

A deputy inspector general of police, Akhtar Ali Shah, said that the security forces responded when they were fired at. “Security forces attracted some fire and they retaliated,” he said in a telephone interview.

The fighting escalated as militants holding positions on hilltops around the riverside seminary fired at security forces holding positions on the other side of the river, he said.

The exchange of fire was intermittently punctuated by heavy explosions as gunship helicopters flew overhead. Local residents said that paramilitary soldiers were flown in by army helicopters to seize control of a militant training camp on a hilltop.

The fighting comes a day after a powerful bomb ripped through a truck carrying members of a civil armed guard, the Frontier Constabulary , near the town of Mingora, the killing 17 guard members and 3 civilians.

The truck was taking the guard members to a base when it was hit by a speeding car coming from the opposite direction, according to a security official. The truck veered off and fell on a rickshaw before bursting into flames.

The security official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly, said the blast set off a chain of explosions, apparently caused by ammunition inside the truck, damaging a nearby gas pump and several shops. Witnesses said many wounded soldiers were seen jumping from the overturned, burning truck. At least 25 people, including several civilians, were wounded.

Officials said that when the charred truck was removed with a crane, an engine and parts of a Suzuki car were also found there. They said the body parts of the bomber had yet to be found.

Since Mr. Fazlullah has gained a following in the province, militants have blown up at least 100 shops selling popular music and videos. According to one account, there have been more than 50 bomb explosions claiming dozens of lives since the central government began a deployment of troops into the region in July.

Badshah Gul Wazir, the home secretary for the province, vowed that the government would press ahead with its plan to restore its control in the area.

“The guys have to surrender,” he said, referring to the militants. “They have criminal cases registered against them. Whether they do so through negotiations or through force is up to them.”

For a detailed profile of TNSM, click here

A lesson in humility for the smug West: William Dalrymple

From The Sunday Times
October 14, 2007
A lesson in humility for the smug West
Many of the western values we think of as superior came from the East and our blind arrogance hurts our standing in the world
William Dalrymple

About 100 miles south of Delhi, where I live, lie the ruins of the Mughal capital, Fateh-pur Sikri. This was built by the Emperor Akbar at the end of the 16th century. Here Akbar would listen carefully as philosophers, mystics and holy men of different faiths debated the merits of their different beliefs in what is the earliest known experiment in formal inter-religious dialogue.

Representatives of Muslims (Sunni and Shi'ite as well as Sufi), Hindus (followers of Shiva and Vishnu as well as Hindu atheists), Christians, Jains, Jews, Buddhists and Zoroastrians came together to discuss where they differed and how they could live together.

Muslim rulers are not usually thought of in the West as standard-bearers of freedom of thought; but Akbar was obsessed with exploring the issues of religious truth, and with as open a mind as possible, declaring: "No man should be interfered with on account of religion, and anyone is to be allowed to go over to any religion that pleases him." He also argued for what he called "the pursuit of reason" rather than "reliance on the marshy land of tradition".

All this took place when in London, Jesuits were being hung, drawn and quartered outside Tyburn, in Spain and Portugal the Inquisition was torturing anyone who defied the dogmas of the Catholic church, and in Rome Giordano Bruno was being burnt at the stake in Campo de'Fiori.

It is worth emphasising Akbar, for he – the greatest ruler of the most populous of all Muslim states – represented in one man so many of the values that we in the West are often apt to claim for ourselves. I am thinking here especially of Douglas Murray, a young neocon pup, who wrote in The Spectator last week that he "was not afraid to say the West's values are better", and in which he accused anyone who said to the contrary of moral confusion: "Decades of intense cultural relativism and designer tribalism have made us terrified of passing judgment," he wrote.

The article was a curtain-opener for an Intelligence Squared debate in which he and I faced each other, along with David Aaronovitch, Charlie Glass, Ibn Warraq and Tariq Ramadan, over the motion: "We should not be reluctant to assert the superiority of western values". (The motion was eventually carried, I regret to say.)

Murray named western values as follows: the rule of law, parliamentary democracy, equality, and freedom of expression and conscience. He also argued that the Judeo-Christian tradition is the ethical source of these values.

Yet where do these ideas actually come from? Both Judaism and Christianity were not born in Washington or London, however much the Victorians liked to think of God as an Englishman. Instead they were born in Palestine, while Christianity received its intellectual superstructure in cities such as Antioch, Constantinople and Alexandria. At the Council of Nicea, where the words of the Creed were thrashed out in 325, there were more bishops from Persia and India than from western Europe.

Judaism and Christianity are every bit as much eastern religions as Islam or Buddhism. So much that we today value – universities, paper, the book, printing – were transmitted from East to West via the Islamic world, in most cases entering western Europe in the Middle Ages via Islamic Spain.

And where was the first law code drawn up? In Athens or London? Actually, no – it was the invention of Hammurabi, in ancient Iraq. Who was the first ruler to emphasise the importance of the equality of his subjects? The Buddhist Indian Emperor Ashoka in the third century BC, set down in stone basic freedoms for all his people, and did not exclude women and slaves, as Aristotle had done.

In the real world, East and West do not have separate and compartmentalised sets of values. Does a Midwestern Baptist have the same values as an urbane Richard Dawkins-reading atheist? Do Aung San Suu Kyi and the Dalai Lama belong to the same ethical tradition as Osama Bin Laden?

In the East as in the West there is a huge variety of ethical systems, but surprisingly similar ideals, and ideas of good and evil. To cherry-pick your favourite universal humanistic ideals, and call them western, then to imply that their opposites are somehow eastern values is simply bigoted and silly, as well as unhistorical.

The great historian of the Crusades, Sir Steven Runciman, knew better. As he wrote at the end of his three-volume history: "Our civilisation has grown . . . out of the long sequence of interaction and fusion between Orient and Occident." He is right. The best in both eastern and western civilisation come not from asserting your own superiority, but instead from having the humility to learn from what is good in others, as well as to recognise your own past mistakes. Ramming your ideas down the throats of others is rarely a productive tactic.

There are lessons here from our own past. European history is full of monarchies, dictatorships and tyrannies, some of which – such as those of Salazar, Tito and Franco – survived into the 1970s and 1980s. The relatively recent triumph of democracy across Europe has less to do with some biologically inherent western love of freedom, than with an ability to learn humbly from the mistakes of the past – notably the millions of deaths that took place due to western ideologies such as Marxism, fas-cism and Nazism.

These movements were not freak departures from form, so much as terrible expressions of the darker side of western civilisation, including our long traditions of antisemitism at home.

Alongside this we also have history of exporting genocide abroad in the worst excesses of western colonialism – which, like the Holocaust, comes from treating the nonwestern other as untermenschen, as savage and somehow subhuman.

For though we like to ignore it, and like to think of ourselves as paragons of peace and freedom, the West has a strong militaristic tradition of attacking and invading the countries of those we think of as savages, and of wiping out the less-developed peoples of four continents as part of our civilising mission. The list of western genocides that preceded and set the scene for the Holocaust is a terrible one.

The Tasmanian Aborigines were wiped out by British hunting parties who were given licences to exterminate this "inferior race" whom the colonial authorities said should be "hunted down like wild beasts and destroyed". Many were caught in traps, before being tortured or burnt alive.

The same fate saw us exterminate the Caribs of the Caribbean, the Guanches of the Canary Islands, as well as tribe after tribe of Native Americans. The European slave trade forcibly abducted 15m Africans and killed as many more.

It was this tradition of colonial genocide that prepared the ground for the greatest western crime of all – the industrial extermination of 6m Jews whom the Nazis looked upon as an inferior, nonwestern and semitic intrusion in the Aryan West.

For all our achievements in and emancipating women and slaves, in giving social freedoms and human rights to the individual; for allthat is remarkable and beautiful in ourart, literature and science, our continuing tradition of arrogantly asserting this perceived superiority has led to all that is most shameful and self-de-feating in western history.

The complaints change – a hundred years ago our Victorian ancestors accused the Islamic world of being sensuous and decadent, with an overdeveloped penchant for sodomy; now Martin Amis attacks it for what he believes is its mass sexual frustration and homophobia. Only the sense of superiority remains the same. If the East does not share our particular sensibility at any given moment of history it is invariably told that it is wrong and we are right.

Tragically, this western tradition of failing to respect other cultures and treating the other as untermenschen has not completely died. We might now recognise that genocide is wrong, yet 30 years after the debacle of Vietnam and Cambodia and My Lai, the cadaver of western colonialism has yet again emerged shuddering from its shallow grave. One only has to think of the massacres of Iraqi civilians in in Falluja or the disgusting treatment meted out to the prisoners of Abu Ghraib to see how the cultural assertiveness of the neocons has brought these traditions of treating Arabs as subhuman back from the dead.

Yet the briefest look at the foreign policy of the Bush administration surely gives a textbook example of the futility of trying to impose your values and ideas – even one so noble as democracy – on another people down the barrel of a gun, rather than through example and dialogue.

In Iraq itself, we have succeeded in destroying a formerly prosperous and secular country, and creating the largest refugee problem in the modern Middle East: 4m Iraqis have now been forced abroad.

Elsewhere in the Middle East, the US attempt to push democracy in the region has succeeded in turning Muslim opinion against its old client proxies – by and large corrupt, decadent monarchies and decaying nationalist parties. But rather than turning to liberal secular parties, as the neocons assumed they would, Muslims have everywhere lined up behind those parties that have most clearly been seen to stand up against aggressive US intervention in the region, namely the religious parties of political Islam.

Last week, the Islamic world showed us the sort of gesture that is needed at this time. In a letter addressed to Pope Benedict and other Christian leaders, 138 prominent Muslim scholars from every sect of Islam urged Christian leaders "to come together with us on the common essentials of our two religions." It will be interesting to see if any western leaders now reciprocate.

We have much to be proud of in the West; but it is in the arrogant and forceful assertion of the superiority of western values that we have consistently undermined not only all that is most precious in our civilisation, but also our own foreign policies and standing in the world. Another value, much admired in both East and West, might be a simple solution here: a little old-fashioned humility.

William Dalrymple's new book, The Last Mughal: The Fall of a Dynasty, Delhi 1857, published by Bloomsbury, has just been awarded the Duff Cooper Prize for history.