Banner Advertise

Sunday, June 1, 2008

[vinnomot] Four challenges for Mr. Moyeen U. Ahmed - Can you tackle these it?

Four challenges for Mr. Moyeen U. Ahmed - Can you tackle these it?
There has been many talk about the general who was appointed by 4-Party Alliance government to lead the Bangladesh Army and who is also currently a key figure in Bangladesh's public discourse, if not power discourse


So, when it comes to analyzing a personality like him and what he has to offer Bangladesh in terms of leadership beyond the official role of Chief of Army Staff, its not a very easy task. Here are few perspectives and challenges that can be useful while assessing the situation.

1. If the governments of the past has neglected in every other sector of the nation, they too have neglected to perform well in the defence sectors. What are the challenges that Bangladesh's Military Forces face? It can not be a fact that during the last 36 years (as we all refer to the life-span of the country), there is not any logistical as well as resource problem with the force. The national discourse has been focused on all the problems with other sectors and we are certainly fixing as many as problems. However, what was the problem so far with the Military that was neglected? What things should current government and next government do to uplift the status of the military? Can you elaborate and demand of the nation about what should we do to make our military forces better prepared? The emergency that we are going through now was human created - you have no option but help the civilian government if you are asked of it. But if an emergency happens in terms of physical situation (something like Tsunami, Cyclone or Earthquake), what do you need to be better prepared to serve the nation? Can you inform the public about your thoughts on this in broader terms?
 
2. With an extended civilian deployment within the country, what problem it might be creating to the military forces? What are the steps (e.g. training, sessions, etc) that top brass of the military has implemented to counter the side-effects of being exposed to civilian administration for an extended period of time? Two issues are here - do you understand and acknowledge the problem? If you do, what you are doing about it? Would you publicly express your concern about this problem and urge the nation to be aware of the situation and do everything possible so that armed forces can return to their original duty at the earliest possible time leaving the actual determination of the timing to the civilian leadership (i.e. president has asked for help from your force, so you are bound to serve as long as needed. However, would it be within the jurisdiction of yours to let the nation know that as the Army Chief you would rather have your forces back to the barrack asap, if and when government allows that)?
 
3. In addition to being the Chief of Army (government seems to be happy with you in that role as demonstrated by your service contract extension), government has bestowed upon an additional duty to you. You are the boss of the national sports body. How is sports doing lately? We understand that it takes time to get results - be it in development or be it in sports. But laying out the vision should not take that much time, should it? Let us get to some speicifics. Do you envision Bangladesh playing Fifa world cup in the short to medium term? Can you challenge the BFF in achieving that goal within the shortest period of time? How far is that goal? Now that a legend in football has taken the helm of BFF, did you ask Mr. Salahuddin whether he has any excutable plan to work toward that that vision?
 
4. This is the last one and a bit tougher. You have been showing your knowledge and interest in the overal national issues including those of political in nature. Constructively thinking, the nation may welcome a move in that direction if you can demonstrate that you have the capacity. Talking free and giving opinions are easy. Lets see if you also have some materials. For the development of Bangladesh, one of major challenge that Bangladesh faces from foreign policy perspective is the issue of its relations with Myanmar, or rather the lack of relationship with our eastern neighbor. That country is our barrier to benefit from a number of things that we would have otherwise achieved from our South-East Asian neighbors. Since Myanmar is somewhat isolated, we are deprived from that prospect since it has not so far provided us the much needed corridor to the South-East.  Also, the problem with the refugees from that nation has been a continued problem for more than a decade. Both the problem can be addresses simultenously. Specifically, since there is new development focus on Myanmar on the part of UN, this might be an opportune time to come up with overal holistic plan. So here is the most challenging idea. It might be particularly suitable for you since the counterparts in Myamnar also wears uniform and your force is largest contributor to UN peace keeping. Seek permission from your bosses in Dhaka first, off course. If you really can do this, we would assume that the current government would be happy. So, here is your fourth challenge. Connect Cox's Bazar to Yangoon with direct road connection by constructing an international standard wide road. Bypass all the usual hoopla of construction work (e.g. tender, etc), rather once an agreement is reached along with support from UN since it will enable UN agencies to use Bangladesh as another base (similar to Thailand), engage the engineering core of the two national armies to build the road within the shortest period of time. Do it with an urgency since an urgent need of reconstruction is there. If that can be achieved soon enough, people of Bangladesh could more effectively take part in the UN-led reconstruction of Cyclone Nargis. That will also enable our businessmen engage Mynmar economy more quickly and effectively including the possible opportunity of contract farming. This would also be helpful for the refugees, if they want to return to their home countries with specific job offer, working for the contract farmers. Let's see if you are really upto the challenge. Build a railway connection, too, between Yangoon and Chittagong (We are sure you have read the novels of Shorotchondro Chattergy. Remember reading few such novels when others were busy with Masud Rana series, many of the heros of those novels of Shorot Babu would travel to the then Rangoon from Dhaka for professional purposes. Having some of those lost cultural as well as economic connections back would be nice).
 
Accomplish all these challenges, or at least show your intention that you do acknowledge these challenges, we are sure the nation will be proud to have such an effective son.
 
If you thought some of the ideas are worth of your reading time, please forward it to others. If you have an ear to the columinsts in regular traditional media, please forward it to them. If you have an ear to the journalists and news editors of the electronic media, discuss it with them. Hope they would look at the suggestions and give due diligence. 
 
Thanks for your time,
Innovation Line
 
=======================================================
Note: This is a freelance column, published mainly in different internet based forums. This column is open for contribution by the members of new generation, sometimes referred to as Gen 71. If you identify yourself as someone from that age-group and want to contribute to this column, please feel free to contact. Thanks to the group moderator for publishing the article as Creative Commons contents.
Dear readers, also, if you thought the article was important enough so it should come under attention of the head of the government please forward the message to them. Email address for the Chief Advisor: feeedback@pmo.gov.bd_ or at http://www.cao.gov.bd/feedback/comments.php . The more of you forward it to them, the less will be the need to go back to street agitation. Use ICT to practice democracy. It is already proven that this government responds to the feedback.
 
Send it the current Chief of Staff of the Army: http://www.army.mil.bd/newahq/index8.php?f_id=2

Also send to your favourtie TV channel:
Channel i: http://www.channel-i-tv.com/contact.html
ATN Bangla: mtplive@atnbangla.tv_
NTV: info@ntvbd.com_
RTV: info@rtvbd.tv_
BTV: info@btv.gov.bd_
======================================================

 

__._,_.___
Recent Activity
Visit Your Group
Yahoo! News

Get it all here

Breaking news to

entertainment news

Yahoo! Finance

It's Now Personal

Guides, news,

advice & more.

Y! Messenger

Instant hello

Chat over IM with

group members.

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vinnomot] Caretaker government has cheated with the country's people.

The word 'cheating' apperars to harsh ........after all that has been done. I dont think the govt diserves such a rude jesture. I think we r unforgiving as a nation.......think of the fate of S Mujibor........What he did for the nation and the return he got........overwhelmingly disproporsionate.

AS FOR THIS GOVT......... EVEN IF THEY HAVE CHEATED (HOW ?) SO BE IT .................PEOPLE SURELY DONT WANT TO SEE THE THIEVES & THUGS DONT RUN THE COUNTRY AGAIN....................ONE CAN ONLY SEEK TO GET BACK TO THOSE DARK DAYS ("IM-E-JAHILIATE") IF HE/SHE WAS A BENIFICIARY OF THAT PERIOD.

----- Original Message -----
From: gopalsengupta@aol.com
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com, khabor@yahoogroups.com, notun_bangladesh@yahoogroups.com, hazarikaa@hotmail.com, chottala@yahoogroups.com, vinnomot@yahoogroups.com, uttorshuri@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [vinnomot] Caretaker government has cheated with the country's people.
Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2008 02:00:27 EDT

 
Sir,
The government is conducting activities ignoring the country's constitution and that's why much problems are arising day by day. So the government will have to take decisions according to the directives given in the Constitution. The poverty rate has been increasing since the take over of the caretaker government last year and this government has failed totally to curb the commodity price hike. Political reforms cannot be done imposing it on the parties as political reform is an ongoing process and the parties will bring changes in their party by themselves.In the name of bringing reforms in political parties and other sectors, the caretaker government has cheated with the country's people.
 
My personal appeal to the military backed caretaker government to do all the good it can, by all the means it can, in all the ways it can, in all the places it can, at all the times it can, to all the people it can, as long as ever it can.
 
Gopal Sengupta
Canada


--
Mail.com Autos - Powered by Oncars.com: Drive By Today!

__._,_.___
Recent Activity
Visit Your Group
Yahoo! News

Kevin Sites

Get coverage of

world crises.

Yahoo! Finance

It's Now Personal

Guides, news,

advice & more.

Yahoo! Groups

Familyographer Zone

Learn how to take

great pictures.

.

__,_._,___

[vinnomot] "Allah, Army and America" - The Central Problem Pakistan Needs to Tackle

May 19, 2008

"Allah, Army and America"

The Central Problem Pakistan Needs to Tackle

By B. R. GOWANI
Ayesha Siddiqa, author of "Military Inc.," termed the Pakistani elections held in February of this year as the third fair and free election. (The 1970 and the 1988 elections are the other two.) The new, but temporary, Prime Minister, Yousuf Raza Gillani, would exit once Asif Zardari wins a seat in parliament.

The two biggest parties, Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) of late Benazir Bhutto (now under her husband Zardari's leadership) and Pakistan Muslim League (PML-N or Nawaz group) of Nawaz Sharif formed a coalition government along with Awami National Party (ANP) and Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI). (The government ministers belonging to PML-N have resigned over the issue of reinstatement of the Supreme Court judges sacked by General Pervez Musharraf's government last year. The PML-N is for immediate reinstatement whereas PPP is not in a hurry.


Should Musharraf be Impeached?

The impeachment process would simply be a waste of time and money, an ego satisfying matter for his critics, and would divert attention from the core problem gnawing Pakistan right now.

The people advocating the removal of Musharraf should remember that the circumstantial-twins, Sharif/Zardari are not saints either. <1>

Sharif's record is no better. Back in November 1997, his men stormed the Supreme Court and disrupted Chief Justice Sajjad Ali Shah's hearings of case against Sharif. Shah was later removed.

In the same year, the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution gave the party leaders absolute power over their members in parliament. At that time, Sharif's Party was in majority and so he became immune from vote of no confidence and thus from being removed from power.

He also altered the Thirteenth Amendment, thus snatching the presidential power to remove the prime minister.

Corruption is not a new thing to either the western or the eastern leaders; Sharif was very good at it too. <2>

About Zardari, the less said the better; he is an outright rogue.

Musharraf is accused of towing the US line on its "war on terror." One wonders, how different Sharif would have been if he would have been in power on September 11, 2001.

During the first US war against Iraq in 1991, Chief of the Armed Forces Mirza Aslam Baig, to embarrass Sharif, opposed sending Pakistani troops to Saudi Arabia whereas the latter was in favor—even though Pakistan wasn't openly threatened by the US State Department, the way Musharraf regime was by the then deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage. Sharif could have at least joined Baig to test latter's intention. (Very soon, Baig showed his true color; he flew to Saudi Arabia and Kuwait to lick the asses of their monarchs.)


"Allah, Army, and America"

It is said that three A's, "Allah, Army, and America," runs Pakistan—more appropriately, they actually halt Pakistan from going anywhere. To be fair to them, the politicians, capitalists, and feudal lords are not any better


The Army

The army has taken a back seat, for the time being, at least. However, being the custodian of Pakistan, any minor excuse will be enough for it to jump into the driver's seat.

As to the US "war on terror," Washington doesn't have to worry; the Chief of Army Staff (and the former head of ISI or Inter-Services Intelligence), General Ashfaq Pervez Kiani, is the man it feels can do business with. He has also been selected for the US Army Command and General Staff College's International Hall of Fame.


The United States


The day Gillani sworn in as the new premier, the Terrorism Hit Men, US Deputy Secretary of State, John D. Negroponte, and assistant secretary of state for South Asian affairs, Richard A. Boucher were meeting Musharraf. <3>

On the other hand, Sharif has talked about the US role in Pakistan:

"If America wants to see itself clean of terrorists, we also want that our villages and towns should not be bombed."

"I have told the US officials that the government wants peace in the world but does not want to turn Pakistan into a murder house."

What will happen is that the US will maintain a low profile, while bombing the targets it wants to but issuing denials. Chances are pretty slim that Sharif may become unmanageable. If that happens, then the US can always ask Saudi Arabia to tame him. (After he was removed from power in 1999 by Musharraf, Sharif spent his time in exile, in Saudi Arabia.) As for Zardari, he is very close to the US. And the day he thinks of walking a different track, the US could pressure the European governments to expedite the corruption cases against him in those countries.


Allah

Allah's warriors are multiplying like insects and worms and have become immune to the barbaric bombings by the United States. They have become bold and it seems no area in Pakistan is outside the range of their suicide missions.

The JUI's Maulana Fazlur Rahman, the person who it was thought had some leverage over the Taliban is, according to Nicholas Schmidle, himself under threat from them for his soft stance <4>.

And it is these religious fundamentalists who the new government should deal with first.


But How?

For the new government, there are two ways to deal with this problem: One is a head on collision in a violent way and turn Pakistan into Bloodistan—and it would be bloodier than the 1990's Algeria, because of the US involvement in the region. And the other one is a head on collision in a non-violent manner, which, of course, won't be without violent reaction from the fanatics.

The second course is much more preferable and will cure the root cause rather than applying temporary patches. For this treatment we need to go back in time


1953 Violence Against Ahmadi Muslims


In 1947, the British left India after dividing that country into India and a new nation of Pakistan. Muslims, Hindus, and Sikhs engaged in gory violence. Over a million people died and over 10 million people migrated, the largest in history.

Within thirteen months, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, passed away. (He was known as Quaid-e-Azam or the Great Leader.)

Quite a few leaders of Islamic parties were against the creation of Pakistan. Nevertheless, once Pakistan appeared on the world map, some of them opted for Pakistan. Many others were already residing in the new nation.

One of them, Maulana Mazhar Ali Azhar is credited with the following couplet written to denigrate Jinnah whose wife Ruttenbai Petit was a Parsee or Zoroastrian:

Ik Kafira ke waste Islam ko chhora
Yeh Quaid-e-Azam hai keh hai kafir-i-azam <5>

For an infidel (wife) he left Islam
Is he the Great Leader or the great infidel


Within no time the religious bigots targeted the Ahmadis, one of the Muslim sects, with hateful speeches and literature, while demanding publicly on May 1, 1949, that they be declared non-Muslims.

In 1868/69, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1835-1908) claimed that he has received a revelation from Allah. The one in 1890 informed him that Jesus was taken off the Cross and once his wounds were healed he escaped to Kashmir in South Asia where he met his natural death. The belief that Jesus will himself appear on the Day of Resurrection is incorrect; the fact is that someone from among the Muslims with the qualities of Jesus will appear as the Issa-ibn-Maryam (i.e., Jesus s/o Mary).

According to most Muslims, the injunction in Koran that Muhammad is "the Seal of the prophets" closed all doors for any newcomer to claim the prophethood. Ahmadis interpret it differently.

The anti-Ahmadi activities of the Islamic parties going on for sometime reached another stage in January 1953, when Majlis-i-Amal issued an ultimatum to Prime Minister Khwaja Nazimuddin to declare Ahmadis as non-Muslims and to remove foreign minister Choudhary Zafrullah Khan, an Ahmadi, from his post. Many Shia leaders expressed the same views.

This ultimately led to violence against the Ahmadis. Many people died and an Ahmadi mosque was burned down. The government appointed an enquiry commission.


Munir Report

The commission's findings, known as the Munir Report, submitted by Justice Mohammad Munir and Justice M. R. Kayani in 1954, is such an enlightened document that none of the ruling hypocrites in today's Pakistan dare mention it; forget about publishing it. Though, it is these times that demand that it should be made a compulsory subject (alongside Jinnah's August 11, 1947 speech) in educational institutions and the Islamic madrassas.

(Forget Pakistan, even the "greatest democracy" won't go for that kind of bold and pure reasoning. However, the truth may come out from the pulpit of Trinity United Church of Christ when Rev. Jeremiah Wright speaks out.)

The Report points out two important things. The first one is that Islam and democracy are incompatible <6>. The paragraph I'm quoting is a bit lengthy but it's worth reading.
"When it is said that a country is sovereign, the implication is that its people or any other group of persons in it are entitled to conduct the affairs of that country in any way they like, and untrammelled by any considerations except those of expediency and policy. An Islamic State, however, cannot in this sense be sovereign, because it will not be competent to abrogate, repeal, or do away with any law in the Qur'an or the sunna [practices and customs as observed by Mohammad]. Absolute restriction on the legislative power of a State is a restriction on the sovereignty of the people of that State, and if the origin of this restriction lies elsewhere than in the will of the people, then to the extent of that restriction the sovereignty of the State and its people is necessarily taken away. In an Islamic State, sovereignty, in its essentially juristic sense, can only rest with Allah. In the same way, democracy means the rule of the demos, namely, the people, directly by them as in ancient Greece and Rome, or indirectly through chosen representatives as in modern democracies. If the power of the people in the framing of the Constitution or in the framing of the laws or in the sphere of executive action is subject to certain immutable rules, it cannot be said that they can pass any law that they like, or, in the exercise of executive functions, do whatever they like. Indeed if the legislature in an Islamic State is a sort of ijma'[consensus], the masses are expressly disqualified from taking part in it because ijma'-i-ummat [consensus of the Islamic community) in Islamic jurisprudence is restricted to ulama [Islamic scholars] and mujtahids [Islamic jurists] of acknowledged status, and does not at all extend, as in democracy, to the populace." <MR, p.210>
When the commission asked the religious leaders to define a Muslim, each one had a different meaning than the other leader.
"... the claim that a certain person or community is not within the pale of Islam implies on the part of the claimant an exact conception of what a Muslim is.... Below we produce the definition of a Muslim given by each alim [Islamic scholar] in his own words. This definition was asked after it had been clearly explained to each witness that he was required to give the irreducible minimum conditions which a person must satisfy to be entitled to be called a Muslim and that the definition was to be on the principle on which a term in grammar is defined." <MR, p.215>
After interviewing each of the leaders, the commission concluded:

"Keeping in view the several definitions given by the Ulama, need we make any comment except that no two learned divines are agreed on this fundamental. If we attempt our own definition as each learned divine has done and that definition differs from that given by all others, we unanimously go out of the fold of Islam. And if we adopt the definition given by any one of the Ulama, we remain Muslims according to the view of that alim but kafirs according to the definition of everyone else." <MR p.218)
All the ulama agreed that the Ahmadis are not Muslims but none of the two ulama agreed on what constituted a Muslim.

The ulama were also questioned as to what if India were to declare itself a Hindu state? The answers were either indifference to the plight of Indian Muslims; or the conquering of India; or in time of war, an advice to the Indian Muslims that they should side with Pakistan. <MR, P.227-230)

The Munir Report's logic prevailed and so the Ahmadis remained a part of Islam.


In 1974, Ahmadis were Declared non-Muslims.

In the early 1970s, the monster rose again. Under pressure from religious clerics and to maintain his grip on power, the Oxford/Berkeley educated Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto caved in and declared the Ahmadis as non-Muslims.

Pakistan Constitution's Article 260:3:
(a) "Muslim" means a person who believes in the unity and oneness of Almighty Allah, in the absolute and unqualified finality of the Prophethood of Muhammad (peace be upon him), the last of the prophets, and does not believe in, or recognize as a prophet or religious reformer, any person who claimed or claims to be a prophet, in any sense of the word or of any description whatsoever, after Muhammad (peace be upon him); and
(b) "non-Muslim" means a person who is not a Muslim and includes a person belonging to the Christian, Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist or Parsi community, a person of the Quadiani Group or the Lahori Group who call themselves 'Ahmadis' or by any other name or a Bahai, and a person belonging to any of the Scheduled Castes [Dalits or low caste Hindus].
Current Situation

The condition of Ahmadis (and other religious minorities and women) had never been good, but with the passage of time it has greatly deteriorated. On the other hand, the power of Muslim fanatics has increased immensely. The Ahmadis cannot call anymore their places of worship as "mosques," cannot greet people with "Assalam Alaikum" (or peace be upon you), cannot go for a Hajj or pilgrimage to Mecca, etc.

The number 6 in the Pakistani Passport's application asks to state applicant's "Religion" and number 25 "Declaration in Case of Muslims" (iii) states:
"I consider Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Quadiani to be an imposter nabi [prophet] and also consider his followers whether belonging to the Lahori or Quadiani group to be Non-Muslims." <7>
It is so easy to label another community's prophet as an "imposter." (So many interfaith groups have cropped up; what is urgently needed is the intrafaith groups.)

Such an open discrimination from the Government of Pakistan, toward its own citizens of a minority sect! None of the US official has to apply for a Pakistani passport and so, I presume, they are unaware of this blatant communalism. <8>

For quite some time now, some of the Sunni militants have been demanding the ouster of twelvers, Ismailis, and all the other Shias from Islam.


Then What?

Let's say that all the Shias in Pakistan are declared non-Muslims. Does it mean that Pakistan—now a Sunni Muslim country—would become a paradise on earth? If anyone breeds that notion, that person is living (not in a fool's paradise) but in a Taliban's paradise—which is worst than hell. Next thing the fundamentalists would want to do is to force all the Sunnis belonging to various sects to become Wahhabis-the Saudi brand of Sunni Islam, absolutely intolerant and inhumane.

If it happens, does it mean that the Sunni zealots would be satisfied? No. Then they'll go after their co-Wahhabis and make them wear the clothes they dim fit, would prescribe a certain length of beard, burn down the video/DVD stores, etc.


Are Taliban the True Muslims?

The Taliban's Islam is to confine women in the four walls of the home, force men to grow beard and wear ankle length pants, and such savage and silly things.

If the Taliban wants to relive the Seventh Century, why don't they follow the example of Prophet Mohammad thoroughly? Ride camels instead of SUVs, use swords instead of missiles, and use tablets and ink pots instead of computers and printers. Taliban are not fools. They know damn well that they cannot fight the white "infidels" with camels, swords, and tablets. There are thousands of things, such as cellular phones, which did not exist during the seventh century.

The Taliban (or the other Islamic fundamentalists) don't have an unflinching belief in their Allah, who is considered by the believers to be the creator of the whole universe. Or else, why would they get violent every time anyone says something about Islam and/or Mohammad. Why don't they leave it up to Allah to take care of Islam and its prophet?

Their fight with the United States is understandable for historical reasons, past and present. Their opposition of the leaders, most of them US puppets, deserves sympathy too. However, they lack the resources and the sophisticated means of "democracy," "human rights," "freedom," and such sacred words—which are in the custody of the US—to carry on their agenda and hence they indulge in the mindless violence in the name of religion.


What the Government Should Do

The first step the government should take is to declare null and void the articles 360: a and b, and proclaim Ahmadis as Muslims, and apologize to them for the past folly. This will make the fundamentalists realize that Pakistan is a country belonging to all its citizens—irrespective of whether they are Christians, Hindus, atheists, or agnostics—and is not some kind of an Islamic seminary where the mullahs can dictate the rules. The government should emphasize that there are many Islams—as many as there are Muslims.

The government should make extracts of Jinnah's August 11, 1947, speech to the Pakistan's first Constituent Assembly, a part of the Constitution. Here are a couple of extracts:
"... You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other places of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed—that has nothing to do with the business of the State."

"... you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State." <202>
Then it should repeal all the blasphemy laws; nothing can be holier than human life.

B. R. Gowani can be reached at brgowani@hotmail.com



Notes

<1> The temporary-twins could turn long term-twins if some arrangement is worked out between them for rotating the post of prime minister. If it happens, it would be the saddest day for the people of Pakistan. Two filthy rich and corrupt leaders would loot together without fear of being opposed.

<2> http://query.nytimes.com/

<3> I have rephrased John Perkins phrase "Economic Hit Men". See his wonderful book, "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man." Talking to Amy Goodman, he said:

"This [US] empire, unlike any other in the history of the world, has been built primarily through economic manipulation, through cheating, through fraud, through seducing people into our way of life, through the economic hit men. I was very much a part of that."

http://www.democracynow.org/

<4>
http://www.nytimes.com/

<5> "Munir Report," p.11. Henceforth MR.
http://www.aaiil.org/

The religious clerics viewed Begum Rana Liaqat Ali Khan and other educated women as "prostitutes." (Khan was the president of APWA or All Pakistan Women's Association and was the governor of Sindh Province. She was married to Liaqat Ali Khan, the first Prime Minister of Pakistan.

<6> Or for that matter, no religion can accommodate true democracy nor can capitalism be the true carrier of democracy.

<7> http://www.embassyofpakistan.com/

<8> I'm just pointing out the US hypocrisy. Personally, I wouldn't want the US to interfere in any country's affairs; it should just take care of the injustices and inequalities within the United States.
 
 
Today's Stories
May 19, 2008
Saul Landau
Cuba Will Live
May 17 / 18, 2008
Dave Lindorff
Fear at the Pump
Robert Weissman
Pharmaceutical Payola
David Yearsley
Puritans in Seattle
Paul Quinnett
My Last Flight
Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor
Poverty Wages
Jeremy Scahill
John Cusack's War
Jeffrey St. Clair
Booked Up
 
 
May 16, 2008
Paul Craig Roberts
Lies of Aggression
 
May 15, 2008
Website of the Day
Idaho Wolf Killers
May 14, 2008
Ismael Hossein-Zadeh
Oil Wars
Hamdan A. Yousuf / Dania S. Ahmed
A Generation Defined by War
Website of the Day
Hillary's Downfall

May 13, 2008
Paul Craig Roberts
How Empires Fall
Andy Worthington
Gitmo's Suicide Bomber
 
May 12, 2008
Peter Morici
Recession Watch
May 10 / 11, 2008
George Ciccariello-Maher
The Yumare Massacre, 22 Years On
David Yearsley
Bacharach at 80
David Michael Green
It's So Over
Ben Terrall
Dealing Sleep
Jeffrey St. Clair
Booked Up
 
May 9, 2008
Andy Worthington
The Afghans of Gitmo
Benjamin Dangl
Polarizing Bolivia
C.G. Estabrook
The Way We Live Now
Michael Dickinson
Jailing the Joint
May 8, 2008
Saul Landau
The NATO Axiom
Kenneth Couesbouc
China's Paper Feet
Sen. Russ Feingold
Government in Secret
Website of the Day
State of the Air
 
 
 

__._,_.___
Recent Activity
Visit Your Group
Yahoo! News

Odd News

You won't believe

it, but it's true

Yahoo! Finance

It's Now Personal

Guides, news,

advice & more.

Yahoo! Groups

Join a program

to help you find

balance in your life.

.

__,_._,___

[vinnomot] Kashmir: A Call for New Realism?

Kashmir: A Call for New Realism?

 

Murtaza Shibli

Editor, Kashmir Affairs

www.kashmiraffairs.org  

 

The moderate faction of Kashmir's pro-freedom political amalgam, Hurriyat Conference led by Mirwaiz Umar Farooq has renewed its call for 'realism' to seek solution to the longstanding Kashmir problem that was once regarded as 'nuclear flashpoint', but has since been relegated to the sidelines as India and Pakistan embarked upon a historic 'peace process' that started after Pakistan's then military ruler and now beleaguered President, General Musharraf agreed to roll back his country's policy of supporting Jehad in Kashmir.

 

Since 2004, both the countries have undergone impressive changes in their bilateral relations as the Pakistani President made a comprehensive policy shift towards India by dismantling Jehadi networks as well as killing or arresting hundreds of Pakistani nationals who had links with various Jehadi groups. In addition, Pakistan signed an anti-terror pact with India that includes sharing information about terrorism. As a result, Pakistan's premier intelligence agency Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) that once sustained the Jehadi networks in Kashmir is sharing information with their Indian counterparts that has virtually wiped off the militant resistance in Jammu and Kashmir. During the last five months alone, Hizbul Mujahideen (HM), the biggest Kashmiri resistance outfit, lost scores of its top ranking commanders in pin-point operations of the Indian Army and paramilitary operations. Ever since India-Pakistan 'peace process', Hizbul Mujahideen that was opposed to the exercise between the two countries has been the main target of both the countries. During the last four years, the HM has lost more than half of its operational cadre that threatens to ultimately wipe its whole resistance cadre.

 

Similarly, Pakistan has also shifted its policy towards the Kashmiri political leadership. While it has dumped and discredited the hard line Hurriyat leader and senior most Kashmiri resistance leader Syed Ali Geelani, it has also adopted a realistic posture towards pro-India Kashmiri leaders of its support for the Kashmiri pro-resistance political leadership. Under the changed policy Pakistan accorded official recognition to the Hurriyat Conference led by Mirwaiz Umar Farooq who agreed to hold talks with New Delhi under the guidance and encouragement of the Pakistani establishment. The rationale of the Mirwaiz to hold talks with the Indian government cannot be questioned; however, what is sad is that despite several rounds of talks with the Indian government the Hurriyat was not able to achieve anything according to its own admission. It has blamed the failure on India's hard line policy, but according to the Indian officials, these Kashmiri leaders did not offer any proposals or ideas during their successive meetings. This suggests absence of seriousness or lack of capacity within the Hurriyat leadership to follow a reconciliatory and mutually beneficial political trajectory. As a result, despite taking a big step of entering into dialogue, the Hurriyat has lost goodwill of the Kashmiri public as its successive engagements with the Indian government are seen as worthless and futile. Similarly, in their umpteen meetings with the Pakistani officials, the Hurriyat Conference leaders have shown more interest in talking against each other or making frivolous demands for their personal gain. This lack of direction amid personal ambition has forced many among the policy circles in India and Pakistan to argue that the Hurriyat Conference is ineffective and any engagement with it is more for public consumption rather than any serious outcome.

 

In addition, the Hurriyat Conference has acted more on behalf of Pakistani leaders for their public relations defeating the Kashmiri public interest. They even supported Pakistani dictator Pervez Musharraf and his rule of emergency – an immature act of political suicide that has caused immense damage to Kashmiri interests. It was due to this heedless support for President Musharraf that the Hurriyat was forced into political wilderness for past few months and ultimately had to publicly apologise for its action. However, it seems that the Hurriyat is ready to move from its political past and lead the way with new initiatives.   

 

The latest call for 'realism' came when the Mirwaiz led Hurriyat Conference leaders while attending a seminar in Srinagar called for reassessment of their strategies. According to news reports, the Hurriyat leaders stressed the need for 'accepting realities' and developing and exploring new strategies, a welcome development from the past when these leaders employed rhetoric amid hot air. Kashmiri leader Sajjad Lone's call for debating whether Kashmiri aspirations are achievable or not is a mature step in the right direction. To his credit, Sajjad Lone is the only Kashmiri leader to have come out with a comprehensive document, 'Achievable Nationhood' that discusses various dynamics of the Kashmir problem. Although, the Achievable Nationhood lacks in its prescriptive architecture, it remains the only such document from a Kashmiri group that deals with the problem seriously. Elaborating on their vision of 'realism', leading Hurriyat leader and former chairman, Professor Abdul Ghani Bhat said, 'Realism is that we have to move in a right direction with a strategy', perhaps accepting that the Kashmiri leadership lacked 'strategy' from their toolkit. Mirwaiz Umar Farooq who also addressed the conference was in his most impressive form because of his honest and frank assertion that 'you don't get what you deserve, you get what you negotiate'. He is right that freedom cannot be 'achieved by writing columns in newspapers or holding meetings in closed rooms'.

 

While the call for 'realism' and working towards achievable ambitions is a positive and a very welcome change, it seems that the Hurriyat leadership is repeating its previous mistakes by failing to debate its policies even within their own ranks. Following the calls for realism, Azam Inquillabi, one of the most senior Kashmiri resistance leaders and part of the moderate Hurriyat Conference has sought 'general discussion' within the political amalgam about any possible change in strategy. This shows that the Hurriyat leadership is prone to fallacies of the past and has not created enough consensus within its ranks before floating significant and new ideas for political engagement. While Azam Inquillabi has not questioned the rationale of such a move, he is right to observe that 'even if we need to review our strategy [it] cannot be done at public forums.... We can meet decently and renew our efforts'. In addition, the Hurriyat Conference will have to renegotiate with other important Kashmiri leaders like Syed Ali Shah Geelani and Yasin Malik without whom any move towards reconciliation or reconfiguration of the Kashmiri politics is meaningless. Further, the Hurriyat Conference has to move from its traditional stand of bashing pro-India politicians and seek a constructive engagement with parties like National Conference and People's Democratic Party. Unless such a dialogue is initiated and institutionalised, the Hurriyat's forthcoming visit to Pakistan is doomed to fail like its previous missions. Moreover, the Hurriyat Conference needs to strengthen its central authority and provide a singular command of leadership without any competing agendas from its constituents.

 

There is no denying that the Hurriyat Conference has achieved some progress towards unity by inviting senior Kashmiri politicians like Shabir Shah and Sheikh Abdul Aziz within its ranks, but its members on the other side in Azad Kashmir seem to be working on a different agenda. The Hurriyat Conference as a political party should stick to its political agenda rather than sending confusing signals. It is really strange to see that the Hurriyat Conference in Srinagar is trying to gather support for a political solution, while its senior functionaries in Azad Kashmir are attending the so-called 'Jehad Conferences' where one of its well known representatives publicly praised extremist groups like Jaish-e-Mohmmad and Lashkar-e-Taibba who have entirely different agendas than that of the majority of Kashmiris.

 

It is high time that the Hurriyat Conference and other Kashmiri leaders learn from their previous blunders that have contributed and perpetuated the sufferings of Kashmiris. They must unite in order to achieve realistic goals and direct Kashmiris towards a path that is away from unending suicide and destruction. In order to achieve this, the Hurriyat Conference must undertake wider consultations and evolve ideas with one voice and one vision built on peace, reconciliation and progress.

 

 

The writer is Srinagar born Kashmiri security and political analyst based in London. He is also editor of quarterly Kashmir Affairswww.kashmiraffairs.org

 



Sent from Yahoo! Mail.
A Smarter Email.

__._,_.___
Recent Activity
Visit Your Group
Yahoo! News

Odd News

You won't believe

it, but it's true

Yahoo! Finance

It's Now Personal

Guides, news,

advice & more.

Yahoo! Groups

Familyographer Zone

Learn how to take

great pictures.

.

__,_._,___