Are we waiting for a miracle?

December 21, 2012

ZoneAsia-Pk

As eight anti-polio workers are killed at the hands of ‘extremists’ Pakistanis once again get swallowed into the black hole of never-ending troubles. That’s what we do with our problems. Let them build, keep putting them off. And then people die because of our own indifference. As news spreads about the 9th anti-polio worker’s death in another tragic attack on the UN, the liberal and conservative, the patriotic and indifferent, together stand on the same end of the spectrum. This is good news for a people who have no sense of self interest. We instead decide who our enemies are and then hurt them howsoever we can, even if it hurts us.

So what is the history of the anti-polio campaign in Pakistan? The facts are simple: vaccines are manufactured in the United States, under WHO standards. Pakistan has the highest number of reported cases in the word at this point (84 nationwide cases were reported last year). Since 2009, 200,000 children have been missing the vaccine each year, making matters only worse on our ever deteriorating portfolio. Why? Because in essence Pakistan’s only ‘well wishers’, the religious anti-West camp, revealed how the United States was only trying to sterilize our people through ‘pig fat’ vaccines. After the fake vaccination campaign by the CIA to capture OBL was exposed, more reason to believe the Tehreek-i-Taliban flooded the already paranoid herd.

As hatred towards the West escalates in Pakistan’s vulnerable North, innocent lives continue to be lost at the hands of drones and the powerful right uses religion as a tool to evade the masses from their own self interest, we witness our own downfall. The liberal, and relatively conservative elite, together continue to bash these attempts as conspiracy theories, yet the problem escalates. Should hatred towards the West, love for religion and suffering from Western policies allow our people to hate on themselves? There seems to be a major lag in narrative: the extremes have been warded off in a place where their voices are muted, and their growth ignored. And this indifference towards them is what helps them grow.

By turning a blind eye and deaf ears towards the booming right Pakistanis have left themselves unprepared for any such attacks. When the anti-polio drives started we were all cheering on for a liberal Pakistan that welcomes health aid and efforts from our allies, frenemies (whatever you want to call them), but until such an incident occurs we keep our faces buried in the sand, not prepared for a reaction. Malala Yousafzai again pops up as an example of such passiveness that we display as a society. This incident reflects badly on us as a people, but it is only a true reflection that we have become. People are like sheep. They need a shepherd. The vacuum the extremists are filling now already existed due to a lack of outreach on the government’s, and apathy on the people’s, part.

Escalating fanaticism, disjointed narratives, and rising problems on every front are not just a consequence of bad leadership, or strong military, or religious influence. Rather it is a product of our Attention Deficit Disorder as a people. We are avoiding our immediate surroundings. The rich either become part of the government or start up a business to secure their lifestyles, the upper middle class try to flee, the lower middle class delude themselves with religion and the least fortunate use drugs or religious rhetoric to make peace with what they have. Those who constantly watch the news feel they have played their part by keeping themselves aware. Facebook causes pop up, and we think signing them will hypothetically take the matter to the ICC or UNO and we will be rescued.

We have political and social explanations for why the incident occurred. Since the upcoming election is the most important concern, most make-do with any explanation that links these two. Perhaps this was a tactic to delay elections, they say. Maybe it really was, but by doing so we once again resort to rhetoric, and ignore our real problems. This incident needs to be an eye opener to us a society. We thought the attack on Malala was enough and then within weeks another extremist backlash occurs. As the UN decides to wrap up the campaign, we have given the world more reason to let us be, and drown in the venom we are constantly producing. We don’t need the West to destroy us. We have ourselves.


Tacstrat: Getting Waziristan Right

November 27, 2012

Tacstrat Analysis

North Waziristan figures prominently on the entire terrorism scene. Every terrorist or would be terrorist arrested indicates some kind of direct or indirect link to North Waziristan making it a point of convergence for anyone contemplating a terrorist act. All reports confirm the presence of Afghan Taliban personified by the Haqqani Network, the ‘Pakistan Taliban- Tehrik Taliban Pakistan and an assortment of Chechens, Uzbeks, Turkmen, Arabs and even Western origin people in North Waziristan together with kidnappers, drugs and weapon smugglers and criminals from Pakistan who go there to rest and recuperate after their latest venture and before the next one. The outreach from this area into the urban centers of Pakistan links it to various extremist militant outfits that are ready to do whatever is required for a price and with the added benefit of furthering their own ethnic, sectarian, political or resource gathering agendas. It goes without saying that there may be, and probably is, external exploitation of this complex situation. This cauldron of criminal, subversive, insurgent and militant activity is the single most important reason for Pakistan’s image worldwide as the epicenter of terrorism and for the economic decline fuelled by a destabilized internal security situation. The combined threat that this situation poses now threatens Pakistan’s existence as a state.

Read more…


Tacstrat Analysis: The Invisible War

November 16, 2012

Tacstrat

According to one of the more hard line analysts a fourth generation war-4GW-has been declared on Pakistan. The dots he connects to make the mosaic are-the insurgency in FATA, the lawlessness and violence in Baluchistan and Karachi, the insidious propaganda to defame and defang the military and intelligence institutions, the rapid economic decline and the overall destabilization created by bomb blasts, kidnappings, extortion rackets and high profile robberies. He traces the origin of this situation to the convergence in US, Indian and Afghan interests and those within the country who wittingly or unwittingly have become their collaborators or willing tools. He does not mince his words when he says that the states’ response capacity has been overwhelmed and the only way out is for a national emergency to be declared and the military asked to clean up the mess and restore stability. Failing this, he thinks the military has to step in to save the country. Failing either of these the country will fall apart.

A softer voiced analyst thinks the overall situation is so complex that all the problems have become interconnected and intertwined so the option of tackling each situation separately and sequentially is no longer there. Any operation in North Waziristan would lead to orchestrated violent reprisals in the urban areas possibly with the Baluchistan and Karachi situations spiraling out of control. He traces the origin of this mess to political inaction and, not just mis-governance but a total absence of governance in areas where it is most needed. That others are exploiting our internal vulnerability goes without saying because foreign policy is the first victim of internal divides and weaknesses that shape the image of a failed or failing country.

Read more…


Open letter to The President, Prime Minister, Interior Minister, Chief Justice, and heads of all political parties, Pakistan

March 7, 2011

by Citizens for Democracy

Please see below Open letter to The President, Prime Minister, Interior Minister, Chief Justice, and heads of all political parties, Pakistan, re: murder of Shahbaz Bhatti and demand for action against calls for violence and vigilante action.
Deadline for endorsements (including name, profession, city): Monday March 7, midnight Pakistan time, after which we will compile signatures and send to the recipients and to media. Endorsements can be made here, or via email to cfd.pak@gmail.com. Please share with friends. If anyone wants to translate it and circulate, please feel free. Thanks

Open letter to The President, Prime Minister, Interior Minister, Chief Justice, and heads of all political parties, Pakistan

Re: Murder of Shahbaz Bhatti and demand for action against calls for violence and vigilante action

The murder of Shahbaz Bhatti, Pakistan’s Federal Minister for Minority Affairs, again highlights the rampant lawlessness in Pakistan and the impunity with which the “forces of violence” act against “whoever stands against their radical philosophy,” to quote the late Mr Bhatti. These “forces” find fertile ground to operate in an atmosphere where calls to vigilante action are publically made and celebrated.

We urge the government and its functionaries to swiftly apprehend, charge, try and punish Mr Bhatti’s murderers, and also to take immediate measures to curb this trend.

We urge all political parties and parliamentarians to take a clear stand on this issue: No citizen has the right to cast aspersions at the faith and beliefs of any other citizen or to term someone else a ‘blasphemer’.

We urge the federal and provincial governments, the judiciary and the security and law enforcement agencies to ensure protection for those, like former information minister Sherry Rehman, who are publicly threatened by extremists

Some immediate steps that must immediately be taken include:

1. An urgent and meaningful shift in the long-standing policy of appeasing extremists, by the security establishment, the judiciary, the political class and much of the media, with a few honourable exceptions.

2. Hold accountable and charge under the law those who incite hatred and violence; zero tolerance for any public labeling of anyone as ‘blasphemer’, which in the current situation is an incitement to murder, even brazen declaration of criminal intent and commission of a crime. Some recent examples of such incitement are:
- Maulana Yousuf Qureshi, Imam of the Mohabbat Khan Mosque, Peshawar, announced a Rs 500,000 award for the murder of Asia Bibi if the Lahore High Court acquitted her of blasphemy (reported on December 3, 2010, a month prior to the murder of Punjab Governor Salmaan Taseer; some newspaperseven wrote editorials supporting this call for murder.)
- Banners placed at public places in Karachi, Lahore and Rawalpindi-Islamabad by “Tehreek-e-Nifaz-Tableegh-e-Islam” terming Tehmina Durrani as Pakistan’s Taslima Nasreen and demanding that she be hanged. These must be removed forthwith and the organisation, and administrative officers who allowed these banners to be placed, proceeded against.

3. Prevent the rising number of ‘blasphemy’ cases being registered, by laying down and enforcing a law whereby no such cases may be registered without being inquired into by a judicial magistrate.

(endorsed)
Please include your name, profession, and city

Organisational endorsements from CFD supporting organisations include:
Professional Organisations Mazdoor Federations & Hari Joint Committee – POJAC, an umbrella organisation including: 1. Sindh High Court Bar Association; 2. Pakistan Medical Association (PMA); 3. All Pakistan Newspaper Employees Confederation (APNEC); 4. Mutahida Labour Federation; 5. Karachi Union of Journalists; 6. Pakistan Workers Federation; 7. All Pakistan Trade Union Federation (APTUF); 8. All Pakistan Clerk Association; 9. Democratic Labour Union State Bank of Pakistan; 10. UBL Workmen Union (CBA); 11. National Bank Trade Union Federation; 12. Karachi Bar Association; 13. Pakistan Nursing Federation; 14. National Trade Union Federation; 15. Sindh Hari Committee; 16. Govt. Sec. Teachers Association; 17. Pakistan Hotel And Restaurant Workers Federation; 18. Mehran Mazdoor Federation; 19. All Sindh Primary Teachers Association; 20. Sindh Professor Lecturer Association; 21. Malir Bar Association, Karachi; 22. Pakistan Trade Union Federation (PTUF); 23. Railway Workers Union Open Line (cba) Workshop; 24. Mehran Railway Employees Welfare Association; 25. All Pakistan Trade Unions Organisations; CFD members and those endorsing the above statement also include: 26. Awami Party; 27. Labour Party Pakistan (LPP); 28. Progressive Youth Front (PYF); 29. Communist Party Pakistan (CPP); 30. Peace and Solidarity Council; 31. Pakistan Institute of Labour, Education & Research (Piler); 32. Action Committee for Human Rights; 33. Dalit Front; 34. National NCommission for Justice and Peace (CJP); 35. Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP); 36. Caritas; 37. Aurat Foundation; 38. Women’s Action Forum (WAF); 39. People’s Resistance; 40. Sindh Awami Sangat; 41. National Organisation of Working Committees; 42. Pakistan Fisherfolk Forum (PFF); 43. Child and Labour Rights Welfare Organisation; 44. Progressive Writers Association (PWA); 45. Port Workers Federation; 46. Shirkat Gah; 47. Pakistan Peace Coalition (PPC); 48. Idara-e-Taleem-o-Aagahi (ITA); 49. Sanjan Nagar Public Education Trust (SNPET); 50. Pakistan Dalit Solidarity Network (PDSN); 51. Sindh Democratic Forum (SDF); 52. SAP-Pakistan; 53. AwazCDS-Pakistan; 54. GCAP-Pakistan; 55. Home Based Women Workers Federation (HBWWF); 56. Labour Education Foundation (LEF); 57. Progressive Youth Forum; 58. National Students’ Federation (NSF); 59. The Researchers; 60. Tehrik-e-Niswan; 61. Democratic Commission for Human Development (DCHD); 62. Crises Support Group of Residents for Defence and Clifton, Karachi; 63. Baaghi: A blog for secular Pakistan; 64. Communist Mazdoor Kissan Party (CMKP); 65. Ansar Burney Trust International; 66. Viewpoint International; 67. Pakistan Youth Alliance; 68. Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI); 69. Youth Together for Human Rights Education (YTHRE); 70. The Institute for Social Movements (ISM); 71 South Asia Partnership Pakistan (SAP-Pk); 72. Institute for Development Initiatives; 73. Shehri-CBE; 74. Institute for Peace and Secular studies; 75. Youth Parliament of Pakistan; 76. Pattan; 77. Awami Jamhoori Forum; 78. Community Development Initiative (CDI)


N.Y. Muslims fear congressman’s hearings could inflame Islamophobia

January 25, 2011

By William Wan
ZoneAsia-Pk

WESTBURY, N.Y. – They called it a summit to teach Muslims how to fight prejudice and fear. But all day long, fear was inescapable in the fluorescent-lit meeting hall of the Long Island mosque.


House hearings, scheduled to begin in late February, have touched off a wave of panic throughout the U.S. Muslim community.

The top issue on everyone’s mind this month at the Islamic Center of Long Island was this: What could be done to stop planned congressional hearings on alleged hidden radicalism among American Muslims and mosques?

The House hearings, scheduled to begin next month, have touched offa wave of panic throughout the U.S. Muslim community, which has spent much of the past year battling what it sees as a rising tide of Islamophobia. Conference calls, strategy sessions and letter-writing campaigns have been launched. Angry op-eds have compared the congressional inquiry to McCarthyism and the World War II persecution of Japanese Americans.

But for those who gathered at the Long Island mosque, the coming hearings represented not just a political issue, but a personal one. For the man organizing the hearings was the very lawmaker who was supposed to represent them in Washington – Rep. Peter T. King (R-N.Y.). Long before he had become their enemy, he had been one of their community’s closest friends.

“He used to come to our weddings. He ate dinner in our homes,” said the mosque’s chairman, Habeeb Ahmed, a short medical technologist with graying hair sitting near the front. “Everything just changed suddenly after 9/11, and now he’s holding hearings to say that people like us are radical extremists. I don’t understand it.”

At the meeting that day, Ahmed, a 55-year-old immigrant from India, was surrounded by more than a hundred Muslim leaders from New York and beyond.

There were Sunnis and Shias. There were doctors, engineers and pharmacists who had left Pakistan, Indonesia and Bangladesh to remake their lives in the United States. There were African Americans who had embraced Islam decades ago and new converts who were learning what it meant to be Muslim in America.

Some had flown in from as far away as Chicago. But the majority were regulars at the local Islamic center, including Ghazi Khankan, who had been one of its earliest members and had defended it for years against King’s scorn.

“We have nothing to hide,” Khankan said. “No matter what King says, others know that we are a peaceful community.”

Although no member of the Islamic Center has ever been accused of terrorism, King has singled out the mosque as a hotbed of “radical Islam” and called its leaders extremists who should be put under surveillance. He maintains that most Muslim leaders in this country aren’t cooperating with authorities, even as arrests of homegrown terrorists are rising greatly.

Now, as the new chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, King said he is finally in a position to do something about it.

“My first goal is just to have people even acknowledge this as a real issue,” King said. “This politically correct nonsense has kept us from debating and discussing what is one of this country’s most vital issues. We are under siege by Muslim terrorists.”

For years, such statements by King have provoked anger among Muslims in his district, but with the hearings looming, there is also a sense of shame and regret. Long Island Muslims worry that what began long ago as a broken relationship between them and their congressman could soon pose a threat to the entire U.S. Muslim community.

Friend, then foe

The Islamic Center of Long Island sits just beyond the boundaries of New York’s 3rd Congressional District. It is an imposing green-domed building nestled amid suburban split-levels and cul-de-sacs.

Muslims were once a rarity here, but a wave of immigration in the 1980s changed that. Today, 70,000 Muslims are estimated to live on Long Island, worshiping at about 22 mosques.

With 400 members, the Islamic Center is one of the largest and most prominent of the mosques. It took the lead in hosting the recent all-day summit for Muslim leaders, at which the discussion often devolved into anguished debate over how to deal with King.

We should pray for him, some said. We should try to vote him out of office, others said. One man proposed organizing protests outside King’s congressional office. Another said that kind of reaction would play into the congressman’s hands.

The problem has plagued the Westbury mosque for the past nine years. But it was not always so.

During King’s earliest days as a congressman, he gave speeches at the Islamic Center and held book signings in the prayer hall. He took in Muslim interns and was one of the few Republicans who supported U.S. intervention in the 1990s to help Muslims in Bosnia and Kosovo.

In return, the Westbury mosque presented him with an award for his work in the Balkans. Many of its leaders regularly contributed to his campaigns, often paying $500 a person to attend his fundraisers.

King was even the main guest of honor on the day of greatest pride for the community: the 1993 opening of its long-awaited $3 million prayer hall, which many proudly note was built completely with locally raised funds. For years, a picture of King cutting the ceremonial ribbon hung on the bulletin board by the mosque’s entrance.

Then came Sept. 11, 2001.

A breach of faith

In the weeks after the twin towers crumbled and the Pentagon burned, local reporters swarmed Long Island’s mosques looking for reaction.

On Oct. 18, Khankan and another Westbury mosque leader were quoted in the local paper, repeating conspiracy theories that it wasn’t Muslims who had orchestrated the attacks.

“Who really benefits from such a horrible tragedy that is blamed on Muslims and Arabs?” asked Khankan, the mosque’s interfaith director at the time. “Definitely Muslims and Arabs do not benefit. It must be the enemy of Muslims and Arabs. An independent investigation must take place.”

Safdar Chadda, a dentist from Pakistan who was then co-president of the mosque, speculated that “the Israeli government would benefit from this tragedy by now branding Palestinians as terrorists and crushing them by force.”

Their statements infuriated King, who had lost friends in the attacks, as had many in his district, which lies 30 miles east of Manhattan.

“At this key moment for our country, the worst attack on us in history, these people who I thought were my friends were talking about Zionists and conspiracies,” he said. “They were trying to look the other way while friends of mine were being murdered.”

The day after the newspaper article appeared, the mosque’s founder, Faroque Khan, went to a neighboring synagogue in a largely unsuccessful attempt to retract and explain what members of his mosque had said.

In the weeks that followed, Khan and others issued progressively stronger statements condemning al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden for the attacks. They forwarded these to King’s office, but the damage was already done.

To King, the fact that those words were ever uttered branded the mosque’s leaders as radicals.

When told that King had specifically cited his statements after Sept. 11 as the turning point, a pained look spread across Khankan’s face.

“You have to understand the confusion and shock at the time,” said Khankan, who is 76, with a shuffling walk and a shock of white hair.

Tapes of Osama bin Laden had just been released in which he praised but was not yet openly taking responsibility for the attacks. Many at the mosque still remembered that Muslims had been immediately and falsely blamed for the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.

After Sept. 11, Muslim children were being bullied at school, and someone had shot a pellet into the Islamic Center’s window.

Khankan said he had spent most of his life working for Muslim groups, trying to create a bridge between outsiders and his community. That his words may have helped plant the seed for King’s hearings, he said, is a heavy burden.

“I just wish I could talk to Pete today,” he said. “I want to say to him: ‘Tell me what I said or did so I can explain it. Give me a chance to clarify.’ “

Targeting Islamic extremists

Since then, King has not set foot in the Islamic Center. Over the past decade, he has become one of the country’s loudest voices on the dangers of Islamic extremism.

He has called for ethnic and religious-based profiling of air passengers and told Politico that there are “too many mosques in this country.” He later tried to clarify that remark, saying he meant that “too many mosques in this country are not cooperating with law enforcement and too many have been taken over or are heavily influenced by extremists.”

Of late, he has repeatedly alleged that 85 percent of U.S. mosques are run by radical extremists – an assertion he attributes to a 1999 statement by Sufi leader Hisham Kabbani at a State Department forum. It was rejected at the time by every major Muslim organization in the country.

But for some of King’s Muslim constituents, his most hurtful words came in the form of his 2004 novel, “Vale of Tears.” The story revolves around a fictional congressman who stumbles across a plan by terrorists – who are associated with a Long Island mosque and work with al-Qaeda and remnants of the Irish Republican Army – that could kill hundreds.

King dedicated the novel to “those who were murdered on September 11″ and explained his purpose in the preface: “It describes how vulnerable we can become if we lower our guard – for even the slightest moment – and if we fail to recognize that our terrorist foes comprise a worldwide network with operatives active within our borders.”

Homegrown terrorism

Few take issue with King’s assertion that homegrown terrorism is rising dramatically.

In the past two years, according to Justice Department statistics, nearly 50 U.S. citizens have been charged with major terrorism counts – all of them allegedly motivated by radical Islamic beliefs.

But many law enforcement leaders disagree with King’s allegation that most Muslim leaders do not cooperate with authorities. In the past, FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III has praised the community. And in a speech last month, U.S. Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said: “The cooperation of Muslim and Arab-American communities has been absolutely essential in identifying, and preventing, terrorist threats. We must never lose sight of this.”

Experts also point to a string of recent terrorism cases that were foiled or reported by Muslim leaders.

Within King’s district, Nassau County Lt. Kevin Smith said he couldn’t recall the last time police received a tip from local mosques. But the detective said: “It’s hard for us to judge what that means – whether that’s because they’re not reporting something or if there’s just nothing to report. On the whole, though, I think we have a good relationship with the mosques in our county.”

Working with King

Many Muslim leaders say that after years of reaching out, they’ve given up on changing King’s mind. At the Islamophobia summit, one man compared it to hitting his head against a brick wall: “If nothing changes, why keep beating yourself up?”

But one leader stood up and urged the crowd to keep trying. His name was Mohammed Saleh, and to the surprise of many, he called King a reasonable man.

“I have met King recently and talked to him,” said Saleh, 63, a balding bespectacled immigrant from Bangladesh. “In many ways, he is a good man.”

Their relationship, Saleh said later, began as a result of the Sept. 11 attacks. As one of King’s constituents, Saleh asked for help because someone with his name was on the government’s airport watch list and he was being detained on international flights.

King helped devise a system by which Saleh could call authorities a few days in advance when he flies. Since then, Saleh has organized fundraisers for King and arranged for him to meet others in his circle of Bangladeshi Muslims.

Some Muslims question why Saleh would raise money for a man who regularly attacks their community. But as a pharmacist who has spent his life weighing dosages and prescriptions, Saleh said he has scrutinized the political makeup of King’s district – a conservative strip amid a largely Democratic state. King won 72 percent of the vote in last year’s election, he notes.

“I am a pragmatist, and it’s clear we have to learn to work with Mr. King,” Saleh said.

Saleh also says that as one of King’s Muslim constituents, he bears a responsibility for King’s views on Muslims. “If it was a broken relationship that sent King on his path now,” Saleh said, “perhaps a new relationship will lead him back.”

So, he spent most of last week trying to meet with King to express his concerns about the hearings and ask King to make sure they are fair.

In response, King said he is willing to listen but plans to push ahead with the hearings no matter how uncomfortable they may be for Muslims in his district or nationwide.

“This was not a fight I was looking for,” he said. “I originally came into this as a supporter and friend of the Muslim community. But now we are facing a danger from within. And we need to see it and recognize it, because it’s not something we can ignore anymore.”


Tory chief Baroness Warsi attacks ‘bigotry’ against Muslims

January 20, 2011

By James Kirkup, Political Correspondent

Prejudice against Muslims has become widespread and socially acceptable in Britain, the Conservative chairman will claim.


Baroness Warsi will warn against trying to divide Muslims into ‘moderates’ and ‘extremists’ saying that it simply fosters intolerance

Islamophobia has “passed the dinner-table test” and is seen by many as normal and uncontroversial, Baroness Warsi will say in a speech on Thursday.

The minister without portfolio will also warn that describing Muslims as either “moderate” or “extremist” fosters growing prejudice.

Lady Warsi, the first Muslim woman to attend Cabinet, has pledged to use her position to wage an “ongoing battle against bigotry”.

Her comments are the most high-profile intervention in Britain’s religious debate by any member of David Cameron’s government.

They also confirm the Coalition’s determination to depart from its Labour predecessor’s policy of keeping out of issues of faith.

Lady Warsi will use a speech at the University of Leicester to attack what she sees as growing religious intolerance in the country, especially towards followers of Islam.

A recent study estimated there are now around 2.9 million Muslims in Britain, up from 1.6 million in 2001.

Some religious and social commentators have suggested that growth in numbers gives rise to legitimate concerns, asking whether strict adherence to the faith is compatible with the values of Western democracies.

Some Christian leaders have also said that Britain has become less tolerant of their faith during the same period.

In response, Lady Warsi will blame “the patronising, superficial way faith is discussed in certain quarters, including the media”. The peer will describe how prejudice against Muslims has grown along with their numbers, partly because of the way they are often portrayed.

The notion that all followers of Islam can be described either as “moderate” or “extremist” can fuel misunderstanding and intolerance, she will say.

“It’s not a big leap of imagination to predict where the talk of ‘moderate’ Muslims leads; in the factory, where they’ve just hired a Muslim worker, the boss says to his employees: ‘Not to worry, he’s only fairly Muslim’.

“In the school, the kids say: ‘The family next door are Muslim but they’re not too bad’.

“And in the road, as a woman walks past wearing a burka, the passers-by think: ‘That woman’s either oppressed or is making a political statement’.”

A decade of growth in the British Muslim population also saw the first al-Qaeda attacks on British soil and Lady Warsi will address the issue of terrorism and extremism.

Terrorist offences committed by a small number of Muslims must not be used to condemn all who follow the faith, she will insist.

But she will also suggest that some Muslim communities must do more to make clear to extremists that their beliefs and actions are not acceptable.

“Those who commit criminal acts of terrorism in our country need to be dealt with not just by the full force of the law,” she will say.

“They also should face social rejection and alienation across society and their acts must not be used as an opportunity to tar all Muslims.”

Her call echoes Mr Cameron’s New Year message, in which the Prime Minister asked why the country was “allowing” the continuing radicalisation of young British Muslims.

Lady Warsi will also reveal that she raised the issue of Islamophobia with the Pope when he visited Britain last year, urging him to “create a better understanding between Europe and its Muslim citizens.”

Despite her warnings, she will recognise that Britain has a long history of tolerance and diversity.


G-8 applauds Pakistan’s efforts against terrorism

June 28, 2010

* Calls for support for economic and political reforms
* Welcomes improvement in Pakistan, India ties

WASHINGTON/NEW YORK: Applauding Pakistan’s continued anti-terrorism efforts along the Afghan border, the G-8 nations meeting in Canada on Saturday called for international support for the key South Asian country’s economic and political reforms.

The leaders of eight influential industrialised countries also welcomed moves by South Asian regional powers Pakistan and India towards improving their bilateral relationship. “We welcome and encourage Pakistan’s efforts to root out violent extremists, especially in its border areas with Afghanistan,” the group said in a communiqué, released by the Canadian Press from Muskoka, where the leaders met over the last two days.

Stressing on world backing for Islamabad’s resolve, the communiqué noted it was essential that Pakistan be supported by the international community as it addresses its political, economic and social reforms. “We welcome and encourage the recent steps taken by the governments of Pakistan and India to advance their bilateral relationship, and urge all countries of the region to work together actively in the interests of regional peace and stability,” the group said.

The group also underscored the need for a broad regional approach to countering violent extremism. The group was also pleased that progress was being made, in association with multilateral donors, on two key projects under the G8 Afghanistan Pakistan Border Region Prosperity Initiative, a Peshawar-Jalalabad expressway and a feasibility study for a Peshawar-Jalalabad rail link.

“We are confident that these projects and others – realised with the efforts of the governments of Pakistan and Afghanistan – will deliver tangible benefits to the Afghan and Pakistani people and help to foster regional stability,” it said. Continuing in the regional perspective, the group said the upcoming Kabul conference will be an important opportunity for the government of Afghanistan to present its detailed plans and show tangible progress in implementing the commitments made in the January 2010 London Conference.

Through a communiqué, the conference made it clear to Afghan government that it must show commitment including measures to combat corruption, address illicit drug production and trafficking, improve human rights, improve provision of basic services and governance, make concrete progress to reinforce the formal justice system and expand the capacity of the Afghan national security forces to assume increasing responsibility for security within five years.

To that end, the leaders voiced full support for the transition strategy adopted by the International Security Assistance Force contributors in April, as well as the on-going efforts to establish an Afghan-led national reconciliation and reintegration process.

In this respect, the June Peace Jirga was an important milestone. Clear steps by Afghanistan towards more credible, inclusive and transparent parliamentary elections in September will be an important step forward in the country’s maturing democracy. app


British forces need material, moral and strategic support

June 23, 2010

It is vital that the military prevent the Taliban taking control in Afghanistan, says former commander Richard Kemp

Colonel Richard Kemp


Taliban fighters in a madrasa near Kundoz. If they resumed control, international terrorist training and planning would return to Afghanistan, says Colonel Richard Kemp. Photograph: Ghaith Abdul-Ahad for the Guardian

On taking office the new defence secretary, Liam Fox, immediately made clear that our troops are fighting and dying in Afghanistan “so that the people of Britain and our global interests are not threatened”. A security rather than a humanitarian mission: “We are not in Afghanistan for the sake of the education policy.”

Fox’s unbending purpose in Afghanistan is absolutely right (although economic, social and political development are vital components underpinning the counter-insurgency campaign there). There are plenty of other peoples around the globe who would no doubt benefit from British intervention to rid them of human rights abuse and economic hardship, but whose regimes do not present any direct threat to our security and therefore do not warrant the sacrifice – so far – of 300 British military lives.

But success in Afghanistan should also save the people there from the brutal oppression of the Taliban. I was commander of British forces back in 2003. My interpreter, Hamid, an elderly and learned citizen of Kabul, had endured years under the Taliban heel, and would visibly flinch whenever their name was so much as mentioned.

The miserable lives of the millions who live just over the border in north-west Pakistan give us a glimpse of the horrors that would confront the people of Afghanistan if the extremists were allowed to return.

Between 2004 and last year the Pakistani Taliban, originally a separate entity from their Afghan cousins, took over, progressively expanding their iron grip on this 250-mile stretch of border. They killed, attacked, tortured and intimidated tribal elders, government officials, soldiers, rival politicians, doctors, teachers, aid workers and human rights activists. Banning long-established local government, they blew up meetings of elders using suicide attacks and fire-bombings, and established Taliban tribunals to administer the unilaterally imposed sharia law.

The tribunals order public executions – by shooting or beheading – for offences such as theft. People are beaten and their heads are shaved for listening to music, watching television, trimming beards or failing to pray at the mosque five times a day. Barber shops, hospitals, mosques and government buildings have been destroyed.

The Taliban violently compel women to stay at home if they are not fully veiled and insist they be accompanied by a male relative if they go outside. Women suspected of prostitution are killed. Females may not be photographed, denying them the ability to obtain official identity cards or register for benefits and relief services, such as food, shelter or medical treatment, and effectively removing them from government records.

The Taliban do not permit girls to go to school, and have blown up or torched hundreds of schools, depriving tens of thousands of boys and girls of any education.

All of these activities continue today, and have been extensively documented in a recent report by Amnesty International.

Some people dispute Fox’s assertions about the threat to our country’s security that would follow if we left Afghanistan before we achieved our objectives. They argue that a Taliban resurgent in Afghanistan would neither pose a threat to us nor be foolish enough again to harbour al-Qaida terrorists intent on attacking the west.

Again, the Pakistani Taliban’s activities are instructive. Despite strikes against them by the government of Pakistan and US forces, since 2005 the Taliban in north-west Pakistan have co-ordinated activities with the Afghan Taliban, launching cross-border operations against Nato and Afghan forces. They give refuge and support to the Haqqani terrorist network and to Mullah Omar, chief of the Afghan Taliban.

Osama bin Laden and his senior leaders, as well as al-Qaida terrorists and affiliated groups, such as the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, live and operate in these areas. Attacks against the west have been planned and training of international terrorists is conducted under Taliban dispensation. Sound familiar?

Of course, it does. And should we again permit the Taliban to control Afghanistan, there can be no doubt that they too would allow international terrorist training and planning to resume – exactly as before. Just as chillingly, they would return the Pakistani Taliban’s favours, providing support and shelter for them and for al-Qaida and associated extremists intent on bringing down the government of Pakistan and taking control of a nuclear-armed state.

With much more hard fighting before the job is done, we have not seen the last British soldier killed in Afghanistan.

The government must give our troops every shred of material support necessary to achieve their objectives and to minimise further casualties. But our brave fighting men and women also need our wholehearted moral support as they continue to put their lives on the line to prevent these nightmare scenarios becoming reality. It is not good enough to support them though. We must also support the vital cause they are fighting for.

Colonel Richard Kemp, of the Royal Anglian Regiment, was commander of British forces in Afghanistan in 2003. His book, Attack State Red, is an account of the 2007 campaign by the Royal Anglian Regiment in Afghanistan.


Pakistan – already playing its role in war on terror

June 7, 2010

By Asad Munir

“We have made it very clear that if such an attack were to happen again, and if we could traced it back to Pakistan, there would be very severe consequences.” This recent statement by Hillary Clinton is not likely to help because threatening a country which is an ally of the war on terror may not be a very wise diplomatic move.

Faisal Shahzad may have been inspired by extremists, but the people at the helm of affairs in the US know that the Pakistani state has no role in the affair. Drones are already violating Pakistani air space, so the severe consequences hinted at might be the use of missile strikes against suspected targets inside Fata and the crossing of the border by Nato ground forces. Instead of considering this option, the US needs to evaluate the performance of its armed forces. After eight years of fighting, they have now realised that forces available in Afghanistan are not adequate to win a war against the Taliban.

Read the rest of this entry »


Obama deflects criticism of Pakistan

May 13, 2010

By Anwar Iqbal

WASHINGTON: US President Barack Obama said on Wednesday that his administration was working with both Pakistan and Afghanistan to break down some of their old suspicions and bad habits.


At a White House news conference with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, the US president also indicated that Pakistan dominated at least part of his almost three-hour long consultations with the Afghan leader and his team. -Photo by AP

At a White House news conference with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, the US president also indicated that Pakistan dominated at least part of his almost three-hour long consultations with the Afghan leader and his team.

Read the rest of this entry »


Pakistan more willing to act against terrorism: Obama

May 13, 2010

US president says his government’s goal is to break down old suspicions, bad habits and continue to work with Pakistani government

WASHINGTON: President Barack Obama has said he is seeing a growing recognition among Pakistan’s leaders that extremist groups based in the country represent a “cancer in their midst”.

After a meeting at the White House on Wednesday with visiting Afghan President Hamid Karzai, Obama said Pakistani leaders were recognising that the groups that were using the border areas as a base were threatening Pakistan’s sovereignty. Obama said it would take time for Pakistan to assert control in the border areas that had been “loosely governed” until now. He said the Pakistani authorities were starting to do that, but it was “not going to happen overnight”. He said while full control over the historically ungoverned areas would take time, continued international engagement with Islamabad and Kabul was essential. He said the US and Afghan officials had been highlighting to Pakistani leaders that the security of all three countries was “intertwined”.

Read the rest of this entry »


Faisal Shahzad & what we should do

May 10, 2010

As expected, immense pressure is being brought to bear on Pakistan to go after the Taliban because of the apparent Faisal Shahzad connection to them. As all this is happening, a spokesman for the Tehrik-i- Taliban Pakistan (TTP) told an Indian news channel on Thursday that the organisation had no link with Shahzad. That, however, flies in the face of what Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi said and also conflicts with Shahzad’s own reported admission before American investigators that he had received training in Waziristan. Furthermore, the timing of the TTP denial, days after the organisation’s very own chief, Hakimullah Mehsud, suggested that the TTP was behind it and after severe pressure from the US administration on Pakistan to crack down on the Taliban, is such that there may be few in western capitals who will believe it. In fact rational and sensible Pakistanis who know the history of the Taliban and how they were created may also have doubts on this denial.

Read the rest of this entry »


Pakistan’s Punjab heartland alive with extremist groups

May 3, 2010

By Saeed Shah, McClatchy Newspapers

FAISALABAD, Pakistan – Even the Pakistan army conducts military operations against Taliban guerrillas in northwest tribal areas bordering Afghanistan, banned al Qaida -linked groups are operating openly in the Pakistani heartland of Punjab, which itself has been the target of dozens of terror attacks.

The province on Pakistan’s eastern border with India is home to more than half the country’s population and functions as its economic and political powerhouse, as well as the main recruiting ground for the military.

It is the stronghold of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, who leads the opposition to President Asif Zardari’s Pakistan Peoples Party , which rules nationally from Islamabad.

Read the rest of this entry »


Forces kill 13 terrorists in Orakzai Agency

April 28, 2010

PESHAWAR: The security forces on Tuesday killed 13 Taliban during a fresh offensive in Orakzai Agency and also destroyed several hideouts in the process. According to official sources, security forces arrested 26 Taliban, including three important commanders in the Tribal Areas and Lower Dir district. In Lower Orakzai Agency, the security forces, backed by helicopter gunships and artillery, killed eight terrorists after a battle over a checkpoint in the Beezot area. The forces also arrested five extremists from the Mashti area. Airstrikes killed five more in the Kasha area of Orakzai, AP reported. The military escalated an offensive in Orakzai Agency in mid-March after militants fled there to avoid a separate offensive in South Waziristan. staff report/ap


A fatwa against terrorism that might work

March 18, 2010

The fatwa against terrorism and terrorists by Dr. Muhammed Tahir ul-Qadri, a very prominent religious scholar from Pakistan, is neither the first, and may not be the last Fatwa of this kind. But it certainly might be the longest and most comprehensive one.

By Muqtedar Khan


The militant moderate

On March 2nd, 2010 Dr. Muhammed Tahir ul-Qadri, a very prominent religious scholar from Pakistan has issued a Fatwa, which he himself described as historic, against terrorism and terrorists. This is neither the first, and may not be the last Fatwa against terrorism. But it certainly might be the longest and most comprehensive one. There have been several prominent Fatawah (plural) issued by Muslim scholars and institutions against terrorism in the past and Dr. Qadri summarizes many of the medieval and classical ones. The Fatwa of India’s most prominent Islamic madrasah Darul-Ulloom Deoband in 2008 and the Fatwa by the highest Islamic legal body of American Muslims in 2005 were similar initiatives but they did not garner the media attention Dr. Qadri has received.

Dr. Qadri is a prominent mega-Imam who enjoys a large popular following. He also happens to be well ensconced in the traditional Islamic heritage. His is clearly a loud voice of the hitherto silent majority. Dr. Qadri and his large following constitute the mainstream of Muslims in Pakistan and in the Pakistani diaspora. Those who are engaged in extremist violence and those who sympathize with them belong to a more recent salafi trend. This trend is a recent transplant in South Asia and does not have deep roots in the region. In principle the traditionalists given their overwhelming majority and deep historical and institutional roots, should be able to prevail easily over the extremist voices now causing such turmoil in that land.

Dr. Qadri’s long 600 pages Fatwa is essentially an encyclopedic compilation of the fiqh of the use of force. It basically accumulates all the various jurisprudential positions advanced by Muslim scholars and jurists of different schools and provides a comprehensive overview of the various normative and ethical limitations that derivatives from Islamic sources have placed on the legitimate use of force.

There is nothing new in Dr. Qadri’s tome and that is a good thing. He is not advancing new interpretations of Islamic sources, nor is he trying to reinvent the wheel. His contribution is to show that not only does Islam prohibit terrorism it condemns the terrorist to hell. He also shows how Muslims have long held suicide as a forbidden act. Islam has always done this from the beginning. The collection of the various opinions of classical scholars too demonstrates the extent and depth of Islam’s prohibition of the use of force against civilians, against women, and against children.

The extremists and their sympathetic scholars, I am confident, will not be able to produce a document that could trump Dr. Qadri’s Fatwa. The extremist scholars in the Muslim World have relied basically on two elements to advance their radical agenda. One, they have exploited the widespread theological illiteracy of Muslims to advance out of context and unprecedented new interpretations and justifications for the principle of Jihad to legitimize their crusade against the West and its allies. Two, they have benefitted from the anger that Muslims have been feeling against the various military attacks and occupations by Western armies of Muslim lands in the past two centuries. Add to this the endless suffering of the Palestinians, Iraqis, Afpak civilians at the hands of Western forces and you begin to comprehend why so many of the Muslim youth embraced the un-Islamic interpretations of Islamic sources by radicals clerics.

Dr. Tahir ul-Qadri’s Fatwa against terrorism might actually have an impact. It is comprehensive, direct, does not dodge any issue. It has come at a time when there is very strong abhorrence for terrorism, specially in Pakistan and it will strip terrorists of what little legitimacy they might be still enjoying in the eyes of Muslims who fear that Islam is under attack by Western powers.

Is Dr. Qadri’s Fatwa a magic bullet that will erode all anger, frustration and resentment; certainly not. Will it engender a widespread loathing for the use of terrorism as a tactics, most certainly yes, if it is given sustained attention by the media. In Pakistan, Dr. Qadri’s reputation, the growing anger against terrorists for their indiscriminate violence against mosques and against Muslims, will all combine to give the Fatwa a chance to marginalize the extremists. Hopefully their supporters will either rethink their politics or at least abstain from openly and actively supporting the culture of violence.

The author and his institution also hope that the perception held by some in the West that Islam is the cause of terrorism will be corrected. I am however less sanguine about this. Those in the West who argue that moderate Muslims are not opposing terrorism or those who insist that terrorism is a consequence of Islamic values are motivated by political interests and are clearly Islamophobic. They will not change their mind. However those who are still unaware that most Muslims condemn terrorists and that there is nothing in Islam that supports terrorism may perhaps become enlightened as a result of this Fatwa.

Regardless of its impact on Western perceptions; if this Fatwa raises even an iota of doubt in the hearts of those who see no other way but egregious violence as a means to alter the condition of the Muslim Ummah, it should be considered a success. We must remember that the battle against extremism is not limited to the arena of discourse. For extremism to disappear a change of discourse about Islam must be accompanied by changes in political opportunities and economic realities. A Fatwa can influence perceptions directly, but its impact on reality is only indirect.

Nevertheless this Fatwa is a good thing. It will advance the cause against terrorism.

Dr. Muqtedar Khan is Director of Islamic Studies at the University of Delaware and a Fellow of the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 81 other followers