Pages

Friday, July 25, 2008

The grand chessboard

Asif Zardari and General Musharraf having no love lost between them have to wait for the right time before they can part ways. Zardari faced cases of money laundering and Musharraf has a long list of questionable deeds of the past nine years to account for. They are destined to remain in restrains until the imperious Empire (US) accomplishes its agenda in the region.

And what is the US agenda? It is not purging the Taliban or nabbing bin Laden in Afghanistan. It is not about introducing democracy or ensuring the rights of women. This hoax must be rubbished. It is about plunder of oil and mineral resources in the Central Asian States (CAS). Unfortunate are the countries having enormous natural resources and poor defence, for the decadent empire will fabricate a charge against them to divest them of their possessions. Afghanistan's misfortune is that it is the gateway to CAS riches. Union Oil of California (Unocal) had at one time signed a contract to lay the pipeline from Turkmenistan to Karachi through Afghanistan. A group of Taliban was invited to visit Unocal headquarters in Texas (Bush constituency) and stayed there as company's guests. But Laden threw spanner in the works by warning the Taliban for having themselves sold cheap hence US animus against him. It is a misconception that had the Taliban handed over Laden to the US, it could have prevented the invasion on Afghanistan. US war is all about oil and against those acting as impediments in its pursuit.

Zbigniew Brzezinsky of Carter era, in his study The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geo-strategic Imperatives, noted how the world's energy consumption would increase, therefore, whoever controlled the Caspian oil and gas would control the world economy. Deeply linked with oil business, Cheney-Bush duo and the neo-cons picked up the thread where Brzezinsky left off in 1997. Bush's bluster that the next 9/11 type attack on US would come from FATA, which to the bewilderment of many, PM Gilani has recently parroted, is sheer nonsense. Taliban had nothing to do with 9/11 neither do they now possess the ability to embark upon such an adventure. 9/11 was an inside job by the intelligence networks, therefore, no serious inquiry was conducted. Had one been conducted, the perfidious US-Israel nexus would have stood blazing on the top, according to Gore Vidal in his book Dreaming war.

We have, unfortunately, allowed ourselves to act a pawn in the US global agenda to dominate resource-rich countries. We must be aware that "superpower" is no democracy, it is a government dictated by the avarice of its corporations. US congressmen do not represent their electorate as much as they represent the interests of the multinational corporations that finance their election campaigns. To reciprocate, they promote interests of corporate America. When George Bush says that the US would attack any country that threatens its security, many doubt the rationality of his logic, because no country poses any threat to US security. But when analysed in the backdrop of US conglomerates' agenda to pillage resource-rich weak countries, the dices begin to sit precisely in their places. There is a well-defined method in Bush-Cheney's recklessness.Naïve it is indeed not to imagine that bin Laden is no more but the empire wants to keep him alive for its own regional interests. Laden was a kidney patient before the US invasion of Afghanistan. He had imported two dialysis machines, one for his personal use and other for the public. How could he still be alive when the US-led NATO forces have occupied the country for the last many years? Insurgency now witnessed is by the local Afghanis whether one calls them Taliban, Pashtuns or terrorists. They want to push the fortune hunters out of their land. Whether or not they succeed is anybody's guess, but for now the empire is determined to convert the region into new Middle East.The empire selects its own men in the countries it chooses to plunder. In its parlance they're called "assets" such as Karzai in Afghanistan, Maliki in Iraq, and others willing to promote its interests and inflict untold miseries upon their own people. Since the bottom line is to plunder resources, therefore, it would not make a whit of difference who occupies the White House, Obama, Hillary or McCain. They are hostage to corporate interests. Presidential hopeful Obama thinks Pakistan-bashing endears him to the controlled US mainstream media. Yet, the New Yorker has ridiculed him by satirising him and wife in its front-page issue, with Obama in Taliban style turban and his wife brandishing a Kalashnikov. Don't we know who owns New Yorker, Wall Street Journal, and other major newspapers that regularly appear in the list of top ten most read US newspapers? Who determines their readability status? Let us not forget we are a blip on the electronic chessboard of US rush to grab the CAS resources.

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Flirting with fire

The upsurge of unrest in Held Kashmir once again is a jolting reminder of the salience of Kashmir. Public opinion polling data managed by the Programme on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, released on July 16 in Washington on the attitudes of the Indian and Pakistani people on Kashmir, is further evidence of how crucial this issue is to the future of the region (vide hyperlink "http://www.WorldPublicOpinion.org" www.WorldPublicOpinion.org).Despite efforts to put Kashmir on the back burner, the core issue of the subcontinent refuses to evaporate. Its capacity to dictate and derail the future of the region remains as potent as ever. Though occasionally Kashmir may look benign to the outside eye, yet, its inflammatory undercurrent cannot be discounted.In 1964, the prospect of an Indo-Pak war over Kashmir appeared unlikely with Indian Prime Minister Pandit Nehru showing signs of flexibility and with the freshly released Kashmir leader Sheikh Abdullah visiting Pakistan. Sheikh Abdullah had to abort his visit on May 27, when Nehru suddenly died. The year 1965 brought all-out war. Similarly, during 1998, when the prime ministers of India and Pakistan were exchanging pleasantries in Lahore, there was little intimation that Kashmir would once again ignite the Kargil conflict in 1999.

The lingering repercussions of the 1965 war weakened and eventually felled Ayub, and the Kargil conflict helped topple Nawaz Sharif. Kashmir has the curious habit of devouring Pakistani rulers. Few causes have had facts, law, and principles so clearly on its side. And few causes have been so mismanaged and mangled as has Kashmir by Pakistani ruling circles. The downturn in Pakistan's domestic situation has benefited India in that it has distracted attention away from Kashmir.Also, the argument can be made that efforts and energy squandered in Afghanistan could have been more effectively conserved and deployed in furthering the Kashmir case. Irrespective of what has occurred in and around Pakistan, the issue of Kashmir remains as is.Some issues don't disappear. Kashmir is like a raging volcano whose lava smoulders under the surface and then explodes with surprising ferocity.There is a moral blindness about Kashmir among Indian security and policy elites, lulled as they have been under the self-deceptive cloak of secularism. Crimes against humanity have been committed under the banner of the "world's largest democracy" including, but not limited to, systematic rape, disappearances, torture, and custodial deaths - all amply documented by key human rights organisations.The case for Kashmir is quite clear-cut. India continues to cling on to Kashmir in violation of applicable UN resolutions calling for a fair and free exercise of the right of self-determination through a plebiscite under UN supervision.Why this has not been done is simple enough. India would lose the vote, in the blunt words of Krishna Menon, who was India's defence minister under Nehru and was the most vocal opponent of plebiscite.This promised and long-denied plebiscite continues to pose an enduring threat to regional stability and also thwarts India's wider geopolitical ambitions.

The key issue here is occupation. Occupation does not work, whether it is in Kashmir, Palestine, or Chechnya. The systematic coercion of one group of people by another to subjugate often leads to the very disaster which the proponents of occupation want to avoid. It is an irony, as well as the tyranny of the human condition, that those who hold their freedoms dear deny the same to others.It is futile to tackle the consequences of violent extremism while overlooking the causes. It is like seeking a prescription from a doctor without allowing him to make a diagnosis of the disease.Kashmir remains an unresolved geopolitical reality. And geography is sometimes destiny. To ignore injustice and human suffering in Kashmir would be flirting with fire.

Hats off to Saudi king

The custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah is the quintessential leader with no equal. He is the guide par excellence. King Abdullah has left other leaders of the world in the dust by reaching out to other faiths in a bid to take the edge off tensions and misgivings that have got spawned between Islam and primarily the other two Abrahamic religions - Christianity and Judaism. He has written a new chapter in interfaith relations by mounting a three-day World Interfaith Dialogue Conference in Madrid with the purpose of enhancing interfaith relations. King Abdullah has footed the bill of this prestigious conference. Madrid was selected as the site for this meeting of note as Spain was where Islam flourished and coexisted peacefully with other religions for the good part of 500 years.

King Abdullah hit upon this idea of arranging a gathering when he met the Pope Benedict XVI at the Vatican in November. It is instructive to note that the king is the first Saudi ruler to have made an official visit to the Vatican where he met Pope Benedict XVI. For all practical purposes, Saudi king has made reaching out to other faiths a hallmark of his rule since taking the helm of the oil rich kingdom following the death of his half brother in 2005. Last month, he hosted an extraordinary jamboree of 600 religious scholars and intellectuals in Makkah, in the vicinity of the Grand Mosque to put a thinking cap on ways of building bridges with other faiths. He, indubitably, deserves a Nobel Peace Prize for his blockbusting performance in this regard.Madrid Conference, which was attended by more than 200 participants, brought together religious figures from all leading religions including Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Shintoism and Confucianism. This has been a good fist of tearing down the psychological barriers that sprung up after the 2001 terrorist attacks in the US. Sept 11, 2001 attacks have put a crimp on the image of Muslims, the world over. What makes one hacked off is that extremism, prejudice and fanaticism are spreading something that may, at long last, add up to a collision resulting in disaster. It is a historical reality that religious, cultural and ethnic differences have stoked up misunderstandings, hostilities and conflict. So the motif of this Madrid Conference was to weed out the communication deficit between the various belief systems.King Abdullah had struck a right note in the conference when he made a plea for "constructive dialogue" to end disputes between the world's major religions. He exhorted the followers of the world's leading faiths to turn away from extremism and embrace a system of reconciliation. He analysed the situation through and through and concluded that religions could combat many of the problems of the modern society - terrorism, the breakdown of families, drugs, exploitation of the weak - as all this is the fall out of a spiritual void. The conference called for an international agreement to combat terrorism, "a universal phenomenon that requires unified international efforts." The participants of the gathering appealed for a special session of the UN General Assembly to promote dialogue and stave off a clash of civilisations.The low-down on the conference is that its essence cannot be underestimated or overemphasised as dialogue between faiths is sine qua non if the world is to sport an idyllic look. Dialogue is the bedrock of mutual respect and making it up. If people do not look up to each other, how can they coexist. And at the heart of the respect for each other has to be the respect for each other's faiths and religious sensibilities. Back in the day, all this mattered less.Cultures and faiths lived side by side, but it was just that - side by side. They were geographically isolated and they did not come into daily contact with each other. But now it is a different kettle of fish. The segregated world no longer exists. We now live in a global village. Go to the USA, to Britain, to France; there are Americans, Frenchmen, Britons who are Muslims, Jews, Hindus, living and working side by side with the majority Christian communities. Go to almost any major city in the world; none of them are any longer single - faith societies. Work, economic development, investment and education: all have drawn in people from different races, cultures and faiths. Mass tourism, cheap flights, the Internet and satellite TV have further eroded the dividing walls and exposed us to other cultures and ways of life. Dialogue does not entail any dilution of faith. Just because Muslims, Christians and others interact and learn about each other does not make a Muslim any less a Muslim or a Christian any less a Christian. It is about breaking down bigotry, thus helping weaken Islamophobia and all the other religious phobias that have marred international relations.But building bridges between different faiths will be a long haul and take a lot of doing. It would necessitate persistent and unabated efforts matched by well-conceived practical steps as it is not a cushy number. In order to make interfaith dialogue get off to the flying start, commonality should be searched for rather than differences between different faiths. Above all, we need to plug away at these steps.

Monday, July 21, 2008

DEMOGRAPHIC DIVIDEND: One Too Many

China is facing a shortage of manpower to support its large-scale industrial and economic development programmes.Demography, commonly known as population is a cross-cutting issue. Its dividends are positive, in the sense that size, composition and quality of population are driving the economies of many countries to grow at a faster rate.Conversely, it is also a stumbling block in the economic growth for many countries. Size, composition and quality of population determine factors in economic growth and development.Countries in Western Europe, Canada, Australia and Malaysia that have a smaller population base fall in the first category. However, to sustain their development they encourage higher population growth. The population policies of these countries are to promote higher fertility, reduce infant and child mortality, improve quality of maternal care and reduce maternal mortality to the maximum possible extent. In addition, they provide benefits in the form of maternity leave to expectant mothers or child care allowance in cash or a combination of both. However, even these measures do not producing desired results for many countries and they have to resort to promoting immigration, chiefly from developing countries.

Migration is beneficial for countries on the receiving end and detrimental for countries from which people are migrating, let alone the migrants’ benefits. The latter invests in health, education and professional experience of its immigrating population and just when they are ready to contribute to the economy; the country loses its quality manpower due to migration.Countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America face the problem of a large population base and high population growth rates, finding it extremely difficult to provide the existing population with sustenance, health care and education. The population policies of these countries focus on reducing population growth and promoting all kinds of measures for population control. Being indirect beneficiaries, developed countries, multinational and, at times, international organisations also strongly persuade population control measures. For example birth control pills, syrups and contraceptives are manufactured in developed countries or under license from pharmaceutical firms in developed countries, but are chiefly used in developing countries.Not much attention is paid to social engineering, creating awareness, improving medical care, promoting safe motherhood, child nutrition and female education in the developing world. Studies show that if a girl has attained primary school level education, her chances of having a child early in her child bearing age are reduced to nearly half, no matter what the circumstances. Sri Lanka has demonstrated it many decades ago.Many countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America are following that model and have shown spectacular achievements in controlling population growth. There is a saying that female education is the best contraceptive. Some believe that if Pakistan had used the funds it spent on importing material for population control like contraceptives, drugs and pills on the education of girls; it could have controlled the increasing growth rate of its population. Pakistan has some of the lowest female literacy rates in the world and has not shown any appreciable improvement in the last decade, in spite of persistent claims by the government.

Population policy is a fancy slogan in Pakistan. Even today, estimates of population growth given by the government are hard to believe. International financial institutions and organisations have their own estimates. Every regime and almost all governments in the political history of Pakistan have formulated their own population policies. But like just about every other claim trumpeted by the government departments and tacitly supported by international organisations, even these are far from reality.Moreover, health indicators in Pakistan have not shown considerable, let alone appreciable improvements, even after massive investments by the federal and provincial governments and international organisations.Countries which vehemently pursued policies of controlling population in the past now face yet another dilemma. Their population is becoming old in large numbers faster then they anticipated. China is an example. In order to control population growth, it adopted its famous one-child policy several decades ago. Presently China is facing a shortage of manpower to support its large-scale industrial and economic development programmes. Japan is another example, although population control measures were voluntary, the proportion of population falling in the older age group has bulged due to a decline in fertility in the past. They need a higher proportion of working-age population to sustain development.Hence the demographic dividend works both ways. If the proportion of population in the working age group is healthy, skilled and educated, the demographic dividend is positive and a country’s development is bound to accelerate.

Wednesday, July 16, 2008

French Revolution revisited

On July 14, 1789, the Bastille, the symbol of the ancient regime in France, was knocked down by the Parisian crowd which confirmed the collapse of the royal power of the Bourbons.Infact a power vacuum had appeared before 1789 with clear signs that the government was economically and politically bankrupt. Things had not been the same since the reign of Louis XIV, which is usually regarded as the high-water mark of the Bourbon dynasty. There were several factors involved, and of course they interacted to erode the authority of the government. Perhaps the most significant to pin down in terms of its results is the general intellectual climate of the 18th century enlightenment. The writers and philosophers of the enlightenment, Voltaire, Diderot and Rousseau questioned everything in the spirit of rational inquiry. Inevitably the illogical teachings of the Church were called into question. Thus the Divine Right of King theory too was stripped of its irrational mysterious shroud and the King no more remained the Holy Cow. But the French government proved strangely slow to see the danger in this new thinking.

The demographic and economic problems of 18th century France proved hostile to the regime as well. In the absence of the industrial revolution as Britain was by then experiencing, great pressure was building up on land and food supplies in what remained mainly a peasant economy. The treaty of Paris in 1763, which concluded the 7-years war in Britain, deprived France of her colonial empire in Canada, the West Indies, India and Louisiana and in the process removed an important social and economic escape valve for France which was becoming over populated for her limited economic base.The economic pressure was mounting but the government paid no heed and remained extravagant with no clampdown in court expenditures. Ten thousand people lived and worked at Versailles by the time of Louis XVI regime. Expensive naval projects such as the fortification of Cherbourg by cones towed out to sea in the 1780’s and cost 28 million lives and it was a ruinous fiasco as they collided, became worm-eaten and sank. All of this had to be financed by a very narrow tax base principally by peasantry. The nobility and the clergy had generous tax exemptions. Sweeping reform of the tax system was necessary therefore if the regime was to survive. The trouble that such a change meant overturning the privileged status of the nobility and the clergy. But the authority of Louis XVI proved inadequate for such a task.The failure to reform for a long time exacerbated the situation and the year 1789 saw the passing of the ancien regime. On June 17, the deputies of the Third Estate declared themselves as the National Assembly. With the storming of Bastille, the National Assembly, set itself to the task of drawing up a constitution for the new revolutionary order. On August 26, the assembly finally voted through the Declaration of Rights of man and Citizen. Freedom of religion was established despite the opposition of the church. The rule of law was central and this was defined with a clear echo of Rousseau’s expression of the general will. Sovereignty resided in the nation, a clear rejection of the hereditary principle of the ancien regime and the rights of men were defined as "liberty, security and resistance to oppression."On September 21, 1792, the French Republic was proclaimed which took the decision to put Louis XVI on trial. Robespierre argued for punishment rather than trial: Louis’s defence was heard but on January 7, 1793 693 deputies voted against him. On January 21 Louis was guillotined.This act of regicide together with the proclamation of republic convinced the European governments that peace or coexistence with the revolution was impossible. The French now talked of expansion to her natural frontiers • the Rhine, the Alps and the Pyrenees. France now declared war on Britain and the Dutch Republic on February 1, 1793. At the same time, The Reign of Terror was unleashed to combat the internal resistance against the revolution. Thus the revolution was at war on two fronts. The internal struggle led to the radicalisation of the republic and the revolution succeeded only partially in achieving its aims. However the significance of the ideas of the revolution cannot be underestimated under any circumstances and the coming generations will subscribe to them.

Monday, July 14, 2008

SURVIVAL REVIVAL: The 100 odd days

Yousuf Raza Gilani should have known what he was getting into when, like Napolean and Roosevelt, he began his 100-day journey in March. All he can do now perhaps is claim credit for emerging from the tunnel he chose for himself.The ‘100 days’ arrived in Pakistan long after the calls for their banishment from the international political discourse.
They came at the most difficult of times under an uneasy coalition brought together by circumstances and not ideology. The term is borrowed from Franklin D. Roosevelt’s incredible 100-day solo run in 1933, in the presence of an aye-ayeing Congress and backed by a friendly press. It refers “to a period of intense political activity, particularly one that immediately follows coming to power. But it has become a cliché and also raises the risk of disparaging comparisons with that most famous 100 Days at the beginning of Roosevelt’s New Deal administration...”The American president had lent respect to the 100-day phrase, cleansing it of its negative late 19th-century connotations. “The original 100 Days was the period between the arrival of Napoleon in Paris on March 20, 1815, after he escaped from Elba, to June 28, when King Louis XVIII regained his throne following the Battle of Waterloo.”

There have been suggestions that “all newly-elected political leaders take a small vow, after (John F.) Kennedy, never to invoke this phrase. Napoleon was deposed for a second time at the end of his 100 days, and Harold Wilson’s first administration (in the 1960s) was troubled with a small parliamentary majority of four and was hardly a model for radical reformers.” In 1961, Kennedy “had ruled out such a rush to correct what he saw as the wrongs of the previous administration; in his inaugural address he said that even a thousand days would be too little.”“In the ‘100 Days’, Roosevelt enjoyed an often-pliant Congress and a honeymoon with the press. By its end, he had passed 15 major laws, given 15 messages to Congress and 10 speeches, held press conferences and cabinet meetings twice a week and sponsored an international conference, made all major policy decisions, foreign and domestic, and, as Arthur Schlesinger notes, “never displayed fright or panic and rarely even bad temper.”

Yousuf Raza Gilani should have known what he was getting into when, like Napolean and Roosevelt, he began his 100-day journey in the month of March. All he can do now perhaps is claim credit for emerging from the tunnel he chose for himself without loss of temper in the presence of a parliament divided by self-interest and an extremely hostile media. He should be mindful though that the new deal that binds his party should not culminate in Waterloo.The completion of the period was marked by two significant events — the blasts in Islamabad and Karachi and Mr Gilani’s own assessment that blaming the past government for today’s ills was not good enough. Others have been pointing out that not only the blame-game has to stop, the current government has to come up with a series of new measures to distinguish itself from its predecessor.The feeling at the end of the first 100 days of the Pakistan People’s Party-led coalition is that this setup is a copy of the Shaukat Aziz government. A bad copy, say the people who have been hit hard by soaring prices and living in perpetual fear of the terrorist.

In his inaugural address to the National Assembly on March 24, Prime Minister Gilani had promised peace through dialogue. The return of the suicide bomber to Islamabad on July 6 and the serial blasts in Karachi the next day lay bare the lack of progress in rooting out the violence that has gripped the country for many years now. The militants are breathing down the government’s neck and new designs to divide the country’s commercial capital along ethnic lines have been revealed.The government, in which Pakhtoonkhwa-based Awami National Party is a major partner, has been repeatedly hit by the extremist groups. It has shown a will to negotiate but few know what concessions it is ready to give to groups of Taliban. A deal has seemed imminent before the two sides have decided to return to their old violent ways.Amid all these love-hate episodes the government of Yousuf Raza Gilani has conceded the authority of dealing with the situation in the North-West to the army chief.That prices are spiralling is bad enough, but worse is the feeling of helplessness displayed by the officials and the employment commission that the prime minister owed to set up is nowhere in sight. Even the Rs 6,000 minimum wage for workers has come to a naught given the inflationary trends in the country.

Reports say work is on to clear way for a return on trade unions in the light of the pledge made by the prime minister in his first speech to the parliament. The government has given some relief to the jail inmates in the shape of commutations while a proposal to abolish the death penalty has, expectedly, been fiercely opposed by the right encouraged by the success of its pressure tactics in the Frontier and right in the heart of Islamabad.By all accounts, the presence of the PPP at the head of the coalition has provided the right wingers with a ‘natural’ reason to unite against the government. The PPP’s own desire to restore to it some of its original appeal is countered by its inability to negotiate a change in the American policy for Pakistan. Politically, the party risks losing ground to forces which are seen opposing the US hold on Islamabad.The past images of the party and its co-chairman in power haven’t helped, but ultimately what earned the PPP flak from various quarters was its inability to deliver on its post-election vow of restoring the judiciary to the pre-November 3, 2007 position. The party had not committed itself to the restoration in its election campaign, yet in mid-March it was prevailed upon by its allies to set a 30-day deadline for the return of the judges who had refused to take oath under the Provisional Constitution Order of November 3, 2007. By and large, the first 100 days of the Asif Zardari-Yousuf Gilani combine have been held hostage by the deadline the PPP set itself for the restoration of the judiciary, an extremely popular issue, at least in the areas the PPP’s traditional rivals draw their strength from. That the party had re-emerged as a strong contender for power as a result of a deal brokered by the Americans was never in doubt, its failure to move on the judges issue was viewed as a proof that it was being kept on a tight leash by the masters.

By contrast the first 100 days of the PPP-led government were a golden period for the foe-turned-ally Pakistan Muslim League. The party, whose public ratings were improving even before the February 18 polls, saw its political fortunes soar in this unit of time. It managed to secure Punjab for itself without much ado and while the PML-N leaders feasted on the gift of sweet mangoes by an equally sweet Mr Zardari, they saw merit in aligning themselves with the popular causes, leaving the PPP alone to do the dirty work after its members resigned as federal ministers on May 12. Considering the criticism that has been heaped on Mr Gilani’s ministers, the party couldn’t have pulled its members from the cabinet at politically a more appropriate time.The PML-N says it wasn’t consulted on the action against militants in the Frontier and was kept in the dark on the potentially explosive hike in the price of petrol and not formally consulted before the appointment of Salmaan Taseer as the governor of Punjab. Mr Sharif’s lieutenants maintain they were not asked but only told that Mr Taseer was being posted as the governor to the province where the PML-N is in power, as if they needed a formal invitation to intervene in the working of the coalition.Much more significantly, the PML-N leadership also made promises not meant to be kept. It reneged on its words twice after agreeing to Mr Zardari’s judicial scheme. In May, Mian Nawaz Sharif told a press briefing in Lahore that he was ready to accept the judges who had taken oath under the November 2007 PCO in the interest of democracy. His party changed its mind and instead chose to take part in the lawyers’ long march on Islamabad in June. Then again the PML-N initially agreed to the provision of 29 judges in the finance bill, only for its stalwarts to back down on it soon afterwards. Those who have been putting the survival of the coalition over a revival of the judiciary have been repeatedly snubbed by the harbingers of popular causes. The proposals save both have somehow failed to catch the fancy of those who could have made and can still make a difference.

Friday, July 11, 2008

Civil-military equation

Since 1947 we have seen 13 years of military rule by Field Marshal Ayub Khan and then General Yahya Khan from 1958 to 1971, 11 years of military rule by General Ziaul Haq from 1977 to 1988 and a little more than 8 years of military rule by General Musharraf from 1999 to 2008 • summing up to 32 years out of 60. Since the adoption of the constitution in 1973 the period(s) of military rule add upto 19 years out of 35.During the 60 years of our independent existence, and more so perhaps since 1973, the armed forces have performed four main roles • mostly through the person of the chief of army staff • in the context of the civil-military relationship.

First, a “role of giving advice” whenever asked or whenever needed. This is a role that is normally performed by a head of state in countries where the effective head of government is the prime minister.Second, a “participatory role” in the three tiers forming part of the Higher Defence Organisation viz the Defence Committee of the Cabinet whose meetings are attended by the service chiefs on invitation, the Defence Council headed by the defence minister whose meetings the service chiefs attend as members, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee chaired by one of their own.Third, a “role in implementation of policy” as aid to civil power. Over the years this role has extended beyond giving help during floods and other emergencies such as earthquakes, and control of law and order situations, to checking of electricity theft and uncovering of ghost schools.And fourth an “extra-constitutional role” in which the civil governments have been replaced by martial law or military governments.Every civilian government has readily conceded to the armed forces the first three roles. The army chiefs have, sometimes openly and publicly, advised the civilian governments on the policies they deem to be correct and necessary.Martial law was lifted in 1985 and there was a civilian government in position but effective and ultimate state power remained in the hands of a president who retained the office of the chief of army staff and who openly declared that his real constituency was the army. Even after separation of the two offices in 1988 the army chief remained a key player in the troika that took the final decisions of State at times of crisis.Throughout the period of the civilian governments in between 1988 and 1999 it is a question mark what, if any, was the civilian input/control over the size of the defence budget. It is certain that such civilian input was minimal with regard to allocations within the defence budgets. There was no debate in any National Assembly during these 11 years on either the quantum or the details of defence expenditures. In this background the decision taken by the present government to disclose the details of the defence budget to the National Assembly is a most welcome development. It constitutes the first step to re-assertion of parliamentary control over the armed forces.The armed forces are no doubt one with the civilian governments in the desire for economic and social progress and institutional continuity. They are sensitive however to real or perceived threats to their autonomy and cohesiveness and want control over polices that require military expertise or which affect their operational activities. In the normal course this should not lead to a breakdown of the civil-military relations. It is crisis situations that undo the balance.

What happens when perceptions differ and the armed forces feel that the government of the day is acting against the national interest? What happens, in a time of crisis, when a significant body of political and public opinion shares the perception of the armed forces that the government of the day is following a course detrimental to the national interest and encourages the armed forces to intervene? What are the service chiefs, in particular, the army chief, to do in such a situation?Are they the servants of the State or of the government in power? Should the army chief have intervened to prevent the storming of the Supreme Court on the basis of the letter written to him by its chief justice? If there is a perceived clash of loyalty between the State and the elected government what should the army chief do • make his views public and resign or intervene? Are we ever likely to see a situation in Pakistan in which the military is subordinate to the civil power in the manner seen and understood in the West?In seeking reasoned answers to the above and other questions it is necessary also to take note of the provisions of Article 243 of the constitution which, while vesting control and command of the armed forces in the federal government, declares that the supreme command shall vest in the president. A question arises whether it is desirable or necessary to give the president, in his capacity as supreme commander of the armed forces, a meaningful role in matters relating to defence and national security. In trying to answer this question we should leave to one side the fact that the present president is General (retd) Pervez Musharraf. What would be our answer if the next president were to be Asif Zardari or Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif?As a result of re-organisation subsequent to the East Pakistan debacle in 1971, the higher defence organisation comprises three tiers. The first tier is the Defence Committee of the Cabinet chaired by the prime minister. The second tier is the Defence Council headed by the defence minister. The Defence Council includes the foreign minister, finance minister and the four service chiefs as its members. It was constituted with the object of coordinating the defence, foreign and finance polices of Pakistan, and for approving induction of new defence systems, subject to the final approval of the Defence Committee.The third tier is the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee. Since 2004 another apex tier has been added in the form of the National Security Council (NSC) through the National Security Council Act 2004. The NSC is chaired by the president and includes as its members the prime minister, the senate chairman, the NA speaker, the leader of the opposition in NA, four chief ministers and the four service chiefs. The stated function of the council is to serve as a consultative forum for the president and the government on matters of national security including sovereignty, integrity, defence, security of the state and crisis management, and to make recommendations in any of the above matters. Is the chairmanship of the NSC a permissible role for the president as head of state and/or in his capacity as the supreme commander of the armed forces?It may be useful at this stage to see how such councils are organised and perform in other countries. In the United States the NSC was created through the Act of Congress in 1947. Presently, its members are the president, the vice president, the secretary of state and the secretary of defence. Others who attend NSC meetings on a regular basis include the chairman joint chiefs of staff, the director CIA, and the national security advisor.In India the NSC was established in 1988 as a three tier structure. At the apex there is a six-member body chaired by the prime minister and including the union ministries of home, defence, external affairs and finance and the deputy chairman of the planning commission. The prime minister’s principal secretary is the national security advisor. The second tier is the strategic planning group headed by the cabinet secretary and including the three service chiefs, the governor of the Reserve Bank and concerned federal secretaries. The third tier is the National Security Advisory Board which comprises persons of eminence from outside the government with expertise in external and internal security, foreign affairs, defence and military affairs, science and technology and economics. This board acts as a think tank for the policy makers.In Iran the NSC is called the Supreme Council for National Security. It is headed by the president and includes the heads of the three branches of government, the chief of the Supreme Council of the armed forces, the officer incharge of Planning and Budget Affairs, two representatives nominated by the supreme leader, four cabinet ministers, the highest ranking officer from the armed forces and the commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards. There are three uniformed persons out of a total of 14.In Israel the NSC was established in 1999 through an executive order. It derives its authority from the prime minister. It is headed by the national security advisor to the prime minister and includes the divisional heads incharge of the security policy, foreign policy, company and infrastructure, terror combat, and organisation and operations, an economic advisor and a legal advisor.In Turkey the NSC is a constitutional body. It is headed by the president and includes the prime minister, the chief of the general staff, the ministers of defence, internal affairs and foreign affairs, the three service chiefs and the commander of the Gendarmerie. The constitution makes it obligatory for the cabinet to give priority consideration to the recommendations of the NSC. The Turkish forces have the constitutional obligation not only to defend the territorial integrity and independence of Turkey against external and internal threats but also to defend the “basic” nature of the Turkish Republic viz republicanism and secularism.All our political parties need to work together to bring about a strengthening of the institutional structures relating to the civilian-military interaction. While doing so they would be well advised to take into account the views and concerns of the armed forces. If this is not done it is possible that we will remain a prisoner of our history which has seen, again and again, the swing of the pendulum from one side to the other without striking the desired balance.

Attacking Iran

Few would claim that Iran is a pleasant place in which to live, nowadays. It was pretty gruesome under the Shah, when there was no free speech and the secret police were licensed torturers and murderers, but under the present management it isn't much fun, either.It is impossible for the people to behave normally without attracting the attention of those who rule in a manner that has much to do with self-important intolerance (as in some other places, alas). President Bush and others say that Iran presents a nuclear threat to Israel, which possesses some 200 nuclear bombs, all deliverable by US-supplied strike aircraft.The US Congressional Research Service, whose analysts are world-class intellectuals and therefore unpopular with those Washington senators and congressmen who do not want their convictions upset by facts, has just produced a report on Iran's nuclear programme. Its author notes that "Iran continues at its Natanz centrifuge facility to enrich uranium, expand the number of operating centrifuges, and conduct research on new types of centrifuges. Tehran has also continued to produce centrifuge feedstock, as well as work on its heavy-water reactor and associated facilities. Whether Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons programme is, however, unknown. A National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) made public in December 2007 assessed that Tehran "halted its nuclear weapons programme," defined as "Iran's nuclear weapon design and weaponisation work and covert uranium conversion-related and uranium enrichment related work," in 2003. The estimate, however, also assessed that Tehran is "keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons" and that any decision to end a nuclear weapons programme is "inherently reversible."Lots of processes are reversible, but who can blame the US intelligence people for having a bit of a bet-hedge, when their product has been in the past so wilfully warped and criminally misapplied by dedicated warmongers?The official NIE finding that Iran's has "halted its nuclear its weapons programme" is irrelevant.
Israel wants to attack Iran, and the Bush administration regards its plan with favour. And among all the reportage and speculation about an Israeli strike came the usual bellicose statements from assorted dignitaries, one of whom, the commander of the nuclear-armed, cruise missile-equipped Fifth Fleet which is bustling energetically around the Persian Gulf, said on July 1 that in the event of being attacked Iran "will not be allowed to close" the Strait of Hormuz. How fascinating.Vice Admiral Cosgriff and his predecessors commanding the Fifth Fleet have been trailing their coats along the coast of Iran for years. Their ships and aircraft have sailed and flown directly towards the coastline deliberately provoking reaction and thus assessing defences.
Reconnaissance aircraft and satellites have produced target information on (almost) every Iranian site that is capable of retaliating against an attack. If an enemy strikes Iran, said Iranian General Muhammad Ali Jafari, "It is natural that (Iran would use) all of its capabilities against the enemy, and definitely our control of the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz would be one of our actions." Iran will retaliate against whoever seeks to be its enemy. The Gulf's shipping routes would be blocked, with appalling consequences.As to the actual bombing of Iran, consider the map of the Middle East. There are only a few routes that Israeli aircraft could take to reach Iran. They couldn't go north and east, through Turkey, because the Turks would react ferociously. They could go south and then via Saudi Arabia (as they did last time, when they bombed Iraq), because Sunni Saudi Arabia fears Shia Iran and might let them through - but if the Saudis did go so far as to help Israel like this, the consequences would be appalling. So that route is unlikely.Overflying Jordan or Syria would be practicable, because the US would forbid Jordan to interfere and the Syrian air force is impotent. But east of Syria and Jordan lies Iraq, whose airspace is controlled by America and nobody else. The government of Iraq has no say whatever in who can overfly its country. And if Israeli aircraft were permitted to fly unchallenged over Iraq's territory (and back; probably with aerial refuelling) it would be proof positive of US involvement. The consequences cannot be predicted in detail, but there is no doubt reaction against America that would not be confined to rhetoric. Of more importance would be the world fall-out; perhaps literally. Nobody knows what radioactive chaos might be created by Israeli bombs blasting nuclear plants. But we all know that the price of oil would go through the roof - even without Iran blocking the Gulf.Much publicity was given to a statement on July 2 by the US Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mullen, when he was asked about the possibility of an Israeli attack. He said, "This is a very unstable part of the world and I don't need it to be more unstable.... Opening up a third front right now would be extremely stressful on us." How this could be interpreted, as it was by most US media, as a sign of "discouragement" to Israel is intriguing. (And use of the personal pronoun "I" says a great deal: who is this man who is grown so mighty?) Associated Press also recorded that Mullen "refused to say what Israeli leaders had told him during his meetings with them last week about any intentions to strike Iran." But we might have some idea, if only because of what he said on May 4 concerning US support for Israel.
He declared that the US "has been at Israel's side for all of 60 years, it will be for the next 60 years, 100 years and 1,000 years. With all its success, I am a tremendous admirer and have great respect for Israel." This was a blatantly political statement by a uniformed officer who was simply following his leader, George W Bush, who is similarly committed to Israeli supremacy. It was reported on June 4, following a Bush meeting with Israel's Prime Minister Olmert, that the latter said, "We reached agreement on the need to take care of the Iranian threat. I left with a lot less question marks (than) I had entered with regarding the means, the timetable restrictions, and American resoluteness to deal with the problem. George Bush understands the severity of the Iranian threat and the need to vanquish it, and intends to act on that matter before the end of his term in the White House."The writing is on the wall. George W Bush is no more a body-builder than he is an intellectual, but comparison with the Israelite Samson is compelling. Bush is pulling down the pillars of civilisation by his reckless barbarity. But while Samson paid the ultimate price for his destruction, George Bush will go into lucrative retirement, leaving the world to suffer from his eight years of arrogance. Permitting Israel to attack Iran will leave a dreadful legacy.

Wednesday, July 9, 2008

Roots & causes of religious extremism

Ever since Pakistan joined hands with US in war against terror, the problem of terrorism and extremism has increased manifold instead of declining. As the dark forces of extremism and obscurantism are now knocking at the doors of Peshawer, there is dire need to revise our counter-terrorism policy. Instead of serving American interests we need to evolve a “national counter-terrorism policy” taking into account our own vulnerabilities, strengths, needs and interests. Military regime’s unitary policies and strategy to solve the issue of extremism through military means has further aggravated the situation. The presence of American forces and repeated military attacks of US drones on non-combatants in tribal areas and regimes high-handedness has made the matters worse. Attention should be paid to addressing the root causes of terrorism through economic progress, social and infrastructural development of backward areas in the tribal region. Causes of extremism in Pakistan are multifaceted and deep rooted which have taken place for a variety of reasons: political and social perpetration by tyrannical and aggressive governments and groups of rebels, within a socio-political environment of oppressive cultural norms, social injustice, ideological contradictions, rigid religious beliefs and foreign interference. The socio-political roots of religious extremism and fundamentalism in Pakistan can be traced back to the political turmoil created after the death of Quaid-e-Azam, who envisioned Pakistan as a welfare modern Muslim state and not a theocracy. Jinnah’s famous speech to Constituent Assembly on August 11, 1947 amply substantiates his vision about Pakistan: “You may belong to any religion or caste or creed – that has nothing to do with the business of the State.” In 1949 with the adoption of the Objectives Resolution by the Constituent Assembly which was tasked with framing the country’s first Constitution. Pakistan became an ideological State on the basis of the Muslim experience in India. What helped in this was the unclear theory of the State in Islamic history. After 1949, the process to transform Pakistan into a religious state ipso facto made the clergy the guardian of the new founding principle.

The problem intensified during the Zia regime under his Islamisation policies. For the first time in history of Pakistan, terror through intimidating policies was used as a conscious policy to legitimise the rule of General Zia. In the pursuit of such policies, the democratic constitution of 1973 was set aside, religion politicized and steps were taken to restructure the state on theocratic lines. The religion card was used as one of the main weapons to pressurize the opposition and to justify the holding of non-party based elections. This period also witnessed the undermining of state institutions by introducing measures to subordinate the judiciary, press and other civil society institutions, under executive. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in December 1979 was a watershed development that brought the superpower rivalry into Pakistan’s neighbourhood. In great powers’ proxy conflict, US sought to enlist Pakistan in strengthening Afghan resistance to the Soviets. Zia regime offered to play role of a front-line state in the Afghan guerrilla war, and sought political, economic and military support from US. It was considered necessary to mobilize religious feelings and jihadi spirit for Afghan resistance. Consequently extremist elements were encouraged and jihadi sentiments were supported, along with liberal funds provided to groups and institutions for training Afghan and other Muslim nationals from a host of countries to wage war against Soviets. Religious schools multiplied in Pakistan during this period and by the time Afghan war ended in 1989, jihadist culture had acquired deep roots in Pakistani society. The militant religious groups, by this time also succeeded in enlarging the political space for themselves, which later aided the mushrooming of sectarian and religion-based violence across the country.

External powers have also played an important role in accelerating extremism in Pakistan. Soviet intervention United States supported and sponsored the Pakistani government and also the Jihadi groups during the period 1979-1989, which in post-1990 period became a threat for the security and stability of Pakistan. Similarly Iran after Iranian revolution of 1979 has openly been supporting the elements in Pakistan and also in Bangladesh to promote their version of Islam. This led to strengthening of religious parties with extremist leaning and boosted the madrassa culture in Pakistan. After Soviet withdrawal and diminishing of US interests in the region, Pakistan was left in a complete lurch for dealing with the menace of terrorism and extremism spread over the decade of its war against Soviets. Sectarianism was one of the inevitable outcomes of Zia’s Islamisation programme and the US’ encouragement of religion to counter Soviet intervention in Afghanistan. The rise of religious influence can be understood from the number of religious schools which in 1970s were around 900 and by the end of Zia era had grown to 8,000 and around 25,000 unregistered ones, educating over half a million students. These madrassas also drew foreign aid, and were sharply divided on sectarian lines. Ultimately the autonomy of traditional religious institutions, lack of unanimous regulatory policies for madrassas, and Zia’s Islamisation of society, injected the poison of sectarianism, fanaticism and bigotry, pitting sect against sect and region against region.

Attacks of 9/11 once again brought Pakistan into spotlight for its geo-strategic location and proximity with Afghanistan. The military regime of General Mushrraf which was desperately looking for a legitimacy cover conceded to US demands. This U-turn in erstwhile policy of supporting religious and jihadi elements disenchanted and alienated religious segments of the society specially ones in NWFP and tribal areas of Pakistan. Subsequent US attacks and Taliban’s retreat into tribal areas of Pakistan led to rise of extremism in Pakistan. Major cause of creeping Talibanization and extremist tendencies in Northern and tribal areas is the way in which Mushrraf regime conducted war against terrorism in the region. Lal Masjid operation further deteriorated the situation and a spate of suicide attacks ripped through the country bringing security and intelligence apparatus to a virtual halt. Law and order broke down, attacks on security personnel increased, police contingents were ambushed, torching of CD and barber shops, ban of female education and challenging the writ of the state have been the order of the day. In order to ameliorate the swiftly deteriorating situation we need to reexamine the current counter-terrorism policy by initiating a debate in parliament. The effort to solve the problem through use of might and force has failed in Iraq, Afghanistan and in FATA. Reliance on military means will only fuel extremism. What we need is an honest national counter-terrorism policy with patience, prudence and farsightedness.

Tuesday, July 8, 2008

Fatima Jinnah — The Quaid’s Sister

Known as Madr-e-Millat, (Mother of the Nation), Fatima Jinnah’s name is an important one among the leaders of Pakistan’s independence movement. Though she is most loved for being an ardent supporter of her brother, Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the Founder of Pakistan. Fatima Jinnah was born in Karachi on July 30, 1893. Jinnah’s parents, Poonja Jinnahbhai and Mithibai Jinnahbhai, had seven children: Muhammad Ali, Ahmad Ali, Bunde Ali, Rahmat Ali, Maryam, Fatima and Shireen. Of a family of seven brothers and sisters, she was the closest to Muhammad Ali Jinnah. Her illustrious brother became her guardian upon the death of their father in 1901. She joined the Bandra Convent in Bombay in 1902. In 1919 she got admitted to the highly competitive University of Calcutta where she attended the Dr. R. Ahmed Dental College. After she graduated, she opened a dental clinic in Bombay in 1923. Jinnah lived with her brother until 1918, when he married Rattanbai Petit.

Upon Rattanbai’s death in February 1929, Jinnah closed her clinic, moved into her brother Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s bungalow, and took charge of his house. This began the life-long companionship that lasted until her brother’s death on September 11, 1948. Paying tribute to her sister, the Quaid once said, “My sister was like a bright ray of light and hope whenever I came back home and met her. Anxieties would have been much greater and my health much worse, but for the restraint imposed by her”. During the transfer of power in 1947, Jinnah formed the Women’s Relief Committee, which later formed the nucleus for the All Pakistan Women’s Association (APWA). She also played a significant role in the settlement of Muhajirs in the new state of Pakistan. During the years that followed, Fatima Jinnah accompanied her brother on many of his official tours. According to Professor Sharif al Mujahid, “People do not realize that just by accompanying Jinnah wherever he went during the 1940s, Fatima Jinnah was teaching Muslim women to stand shoulder to shoulder with men during the freedom struggle. Numerous pictures of the period show Fatima Jinnah walking alongside Jinnah and not behind him. The message was loud and clear and it was one both the brother and sister wished to convey to the nation.” She also joined the All India Muslim League and attended the annual sessions. She helped form the All India Muslim Women Students Federation in 941 in Delhi. “Fatima Jinnah’s contribution in the social development sector has, however, been ignored somewhat.

This has largely been overshadowed by her political role despite the fact that she, along with Begum Rana Liaquat Ali Khan, made the greatest contribution in the realm of women’s awakening and participation in national affairs and their empowerment,” wrote professor Sharif al Mujahid. In the 1960s, Jinnah returned to the forefront of political life when she ran for the presidency of Pakistan. She described her opponent, Ayub Khan, as a dictator. Her early rallies nearly 250,000 people turned out to see her in Dhaka, and a million lined the 293 mile route from there to Chittagong. Her train, called the Freedom Special, was 22 hours late because men at each station pulled the emergency cord, and begged her to speak. The crowds hailed her as the mother of the nation. In her rallied Jinnah argued that, by coming to terms with India on the Indus Water dispute, Ayub had surrendered control of the rivers to India. Jinnah lost the election, but only narrowly, winning a majority in some provinces. The election did not conform to international standards and journalists, as well as subsequent historians, have often suggested it was rigged in favour of Ayub Khan. Fatima Jinnah’s unfinished biography of the Quaid, “My Brother”, was published by the Quaid-i-Azam Academy in 1987. It is thought that the publication of Hector Bolitho’s book, “Jinnah Creator of Pakistan” in 1954 prompted Miss Jinnah to write the book about her brother as it was felt that Bolitho’s own book had failed to bring out the political aspects of her brother’s life..” Fatima Jinnah died in Karachi on July 8, 1967. The official cause of death was heart failure, but rumours persist that she was murdered by the same group who killed Liaquat Ali Khan. In 2003, the nephew of the Quaid-i-Azam, Akbar Pirbhai, reignited the controversy by suggesting that she was assassinated.

The following are excerpts from some of her statements. 1963 - Madar-i-Millat’s Message to the Nation on Quaid-i-Azam’s Birthday: “The movement of Pakistan which the Quaid-i-Azam launched was ethical in inspiration and ideological in content. The story of this movement is a story of the ideals of equality, fraternity and social and economic justice struggling against the forces of domination, exploitation, intolerance and tyranny”. 1965 - Madar-i-Millat’s Message to the Nation on Eid ul-Adha: “Let us sink all our differences and stand united together under the same banner under which we truly achieved Pakistan and let us demonstrate once again that we can, united, face all dangers in the cause of glory of Pakistan, the glory that the Quaid-i-Azam envisaged for Pakistan.” 1967 - Madar-i-Millat’s Message to the Nation on Eid ul-Adha: “The immediate task before you is to face the problem and bring the country back on the right path with the bugles of Quaid-i-Azam’s message. March forward under the banner of star and the crescent with unity in your ranks, faith in your mission and discipline. Fulfill your mission and a great sublime future awaits your enthusiasm and action. Remember: ‘cowards die many times before death; the valiant never taste death but once.’ This is the only course of action which suits any self-respecting people and certainly the Muslim Nation.”

Saturday, July 5, 2008

Who are behind militancy in FATA?

With the suspension of peace agreements by Pakistan’s Taliban movement, signed with the new civilian government in the recent past in reaction to the operation launched on June 28, 2008 by the paramilitary troops which demolished the hideouts of the Lashkar-i-Islam and Ansarul Islam in Bara region of Khyber Agency including suburbs of Peshawar to check the “growing criminal activities” of their militants, again an intriguing situation has been created by the external elements in the Frontier Province, which is sending negative signals to Pakistani nation. Just one day after the operation, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani disclosed that there were “several enemies of the country” and “foreign hands were also involved in the acts of terrorism”. The statement needs rational explanation in light of the background of peace pacts and their suspension, which were signed with the tribal militant leaders in the national interest of Pakistan. In fact, some external enemies of our country have been opposing the FATA peace process so that insurgents could continue their criminal activities in the Frontier Province which is the most volatile region where they can test the integrity of Pakistan.

Since the beginning of the peace dialogue, the US Administration has been increasing pressure on Islamabad to suspend talks with the tribal activists. On May 20, 2008, favouring the US concerns regarding the tribal peace move, US Deputy Secretary of State, Negroponte had agreed with the American Congress lawmakers in putting pressure on Islamabad to call off its deals with the tribal militants. Meanwhile, a recent report of the Pentagon pointed out that Afghanistan is now rivalling Iraq as the biggest cause of concerns for the United States. The report coincides with recent warnings by senior US military and intelligence officials that the next plot by Al Qaeda to attack inside America will be made in Pakistan’s FATA regions. In this respect, President Hamid Karzai’s recent threat of targeting militant’s locations inside Pakistani territories, just a few days after the US-led NATO’s airstikes in the Mohmand tribal agency coincided with the accusation of cross border terrorism in relation to Islamabad. Hence, they intend to sabotage the tribal peace process. In fact, demoralized in crushing the stiff resistance of the Afghan Taliban who have been fighting against the occupying forces, US-led coalition troops, equipped with sophisticated weaponry and Kabul-led puppet regime of Hamid Karzai have badly failed in Afghanistan. Besides diverting the attention of their publics from their unsuccessful policy, they want to fulfil a number of aims by supporting the militancy in FATA.

India has added a new factor in joining the US anti-Pakistan enterprise by availing the golden opportunity to fulfill her own interests. New Delhi intends to gain leverage in the Pak-India ‘composite dialogue’ which are being held intermittently. She clandestinely favours internal and external pressure on Pakistan in this regard—also to divert the attention of the West from her atrocities, being perpetrated on the innocent Kashmiris. It is of particular attention that more than 50 Indian foreign offices along with the north-western border of our country are supporting the saboteurs to conduct bomb blasts in Pakistan. It is notable that despite the strenuous efforts of Islamabad, more than 3 million Afghan refugees who have not retuned to Afghanistan are involved in unlawful activities. Some of them are serving as agents of CIA, RAW and Khad and are implementing the common hidden agendas of their counties. They also pose themselves as Pakistani Taliban and have played a key role in creating a rift between the pro-government activist groups who had agreed for peace accords and those who opposed the same. These elements manipulated the situation and performed their assigned job in re-initiating subversive acts. These agents with dollars in their pockets are distorting the image of the peace-loving Pushtuns of FATA where majority of the people are moderate and want peace as success of the moderate elements and defeat of the extremists in election 2008 has proved there. Despite the peace deals of the new government with the Taliban, bombblasts in Mardan, Kohat, Swat etc. has kept on going to harm the government-Taliban peace accords.

It was due to new subversive acts of the militants in FATA regions and Swat that on June 29, 2008, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani said that some locals had breached the agreement with the government by kidnapping minority persons (16 Christians) from Peshawar, demolishing girl’s school and executing two persons. He favoured the political dialogue but made it clear that force would be used to enforce the government’s writ which had been challenged by some tribal activists. He also revealed that coalition partners had been taken into confidence before the ongoing operation and his regime did not initiate it under external pressure as Pakistan is a sovereign state. On June 26, 2008, Foreign Office spokesman Muhammad Sadiq also revealed, “Foreign governments and militants are involved in the turbulent situation, prevalent in the tribal areas”. There are other fundamental reasons behind the collusion against Pakistan. Fast growing economic power of China coupled with her strategic relationship with Pakistan—Beijing’s investment in development of Gwadar, a seaport of geo-strategic importance has irked the eyes of Americans and Indians. Owing to mutual jealousy, tactical support of Washington to New Delhi, indirect military aid through Israel,—all are part of American desire to make India a major power to counterbalance China in Asia. Therefore, US real partners like India and Afghanistan who were already creating lawlessness in Pakistan by supporting some anti-state elements in the provinces of Sindh and Balochistan found the FATA areas to be suitable ground where they could act upon their plot with the help of a perennial western propaganda against Islamabad.

In this respect, we should not ignore the double-game of these US-led state actors who are trying to convert Pakistan into another failed state like Rwanda. Particularly unrest in the FATA areas shall justify the deployment of NATO forces in the country with the pretension that Pakistan is a terrorist state and nuclear weapons may go into the hands of Al Qaeda. At this critical juncture, when Pakistan is facing multiple cries of grave nature, the real aim of the external plotters is to create a rift between the army on the one side and the general masses led by the politicians on the other. To achieve their sinister designs, they are manipulating the new drastic phenomena of tribal areas that they themselves created covertly. This fact could be gauged from the US news intelligence service, Stratfor which indicated on March 25, 2008 that the new political forces of Pakistan “cannot afford to dismiss national sentiment in policy-making” and can be expected “to derive a hard bargaining with Washington on the parameters of counterterrorism cooperation”. It also disclosed that “in turn, Washington which has extensive experience in dealing with Pakistani leaders and rulers will try to exploit differences among various stakeholders in the new regime to secure the goals”. We can conclude without any doubt that India, Afghanistan and the US are behind the growing militancy in FATA to destabilize Pakistan with the sole aim to achieve their covert strategic goals.

Friday, July 4, 2008

Insurgency in FATA

The Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) include seven Agencies viz Bajaur, Orakzai, Mohmand, Khyber, Kurram, North Waziristan and South Waziristan, and the tribal areas adjoining Peshawar, Kohat, Bannu, Dera Ismail Khan, Lakki Marwat and Tank districts. Article 247 provides for governance of these areas in a manner altogether different from the rest of Pakistan. The tribal areas are administered by the Governor NWFP as per directions given by the President of Pakistan. No Act passed by parliament applies to the tribal areas except to the extent permitted by the president. The president has the power to make laws for the tribal areas in respect of any matter within the legislative competence of parliament.

The president can also make regulations, with respect to any matter, for the peace and good governance of these areas. Neither the Supreme Court nor the High Court can exercise any jurisdiction in relation to the tribal areas unless the parliament by law provides otherwise. There is, therefore, no constitutional guarantee of fundamental rights for the citizens of FATA as enjoyed by citizens in the rest of Pakistan. With an estimated population of about 3.50 million FATA has 12 representatives in the national assembly and 8 in the senate. These representatives can make laws for the rest of Pakistan but not for the areas they represent.The administrative set-up includes, at Islamabad, the ministry of states and frontier regions and, at Peshawar, the FATA civil secretariat under the Governor NWFP. In the field the administrative and law and order set-up includes the political agents, like the maliks, the khassadars/levies and the frontier corps. The governing law is the Frontier Crimes Regulation which is administered through the tribal jirgas and not through the courts of law. Responsibility for the crime committed by a member of a tribe is the collective responsibility of that tribe which then proceeds to punish its own offending member.

The insurgency commenced in 2002 in South Waziristan. It is probable that non-locals were largely responsible. Talibanised elements were responsible for spreading these disturbances into North Waziristan in 2004. There was sabotage of government installations and considerable cross-border movements and attacks. Afghans, Chechens, Uzbeks and others crossing into North Waziristan were given shelter by the local tribes as part of their rewaj. From North Waziristan the talibanisation spread into Bajaur and Mohmand Agencies, as also into the frontier regions of Bannu and Kohat districts. In Kurram Agency the violence was sectarian in nature leaving hundreds of Sunnis and Shias dead in its wake.The government attempted to meet this problem through a number of peace agreements with the militants including the Shakai Peace Agreement with the Wazir Tribe (South Waziristan) in 2004, the Sararogha Agreement with the Mehsud Tribe (South Waziristan) in 2005, the Eviction of Foreigners Wana Agreement in 2007, the Peace Accord with the Utmanzai Wazir Tribe (North Waziristan) in 2006 and the Peace Accord (North Waziristan) in 2008. These agreements and accords have resulted in eviction of some foreigners and intermittent peace but none of these agreements have proved to be lasting in nature. Who is responsible for the breakdown of each successive agreement? The government of the locals or the foreigners in FATA or some outside power?The causes of militancy are not far to seek. If a majority of people in the rest of Pakistan feel that we are fighting the US war on terror and not our own, for the citizens of FATA this is a religious belief. The hatred caused by thousands of civilian casualties is accentuated by the perceived failure of the State to effectively address very real economic and social deprivation.There is no statistical documentation of poverty levels in FATA. However, studies conducted by the Asian Development Bank in 2006 reveal that drinking water is in short supply throughout the region, infant and child mortality rates are higher than in the rest of Pakistan, education facilities are deficient in most villages and practically non-existent for girls, literacy rates are the lowest in the country and health facilities are substandard at best. The ADB study estimates that 60 percent of the people in Bajaur, Mohmand and Khyber live below the poverty line and that the female literacy rate in FATA as a whole is about 3 percent. There are between 800 to 1000 madrassahs that have filled the gap created by the State's failure to cater for the educational needs of the people. They provide free education, free food and free clothing to their students. Their affiliation is mostly with the Deobandi and (in Kurram) Shia schools of thought. It serves no purpose to say that they are the breeding grounds for militancy in the absence of any real effort to set-up government schools providing equally good, if not better, facilities.

Less than 7 percent of FATA land is arable and hence agriculture sector development has to concentrate on the potential for growth in livestock, fodder and milk production. The region has considerable deposits of marble, copper, limestone and coal which can be the basis for the establishment of industries that utilise these minerals. In the absence of a vibrant private sector it is the government and its agencies that will have to play a leading role in the socio-economic development of FATA for many years to come. Large development outlays for FATA are required but the pre-requisite for the success of such development programmes is durable peace in the area and "ownership" of these programmes by the people.What is the way forward? The eventual goal must be to integrate FATA into Pakistan in a manner that over time it is no different from any other part of Pakistan. With this final goal in mind, the question is on how and in what time frame to get there. One immediate step could be to constitute an elected council for FATA in the same manner as the Legislative Council for the Northern Areas. The 36-member Legislative Council for the Northern Areas has legislative powers in respect of 49 subjects and its own chief executive. The FATA Legislative Council could eventually be transformed into a provincial assembly once the time is ripe to reconstitute FATA into a separate province of Pakistan. The alternative option of absorbing FATA into the NWFP is there but this would require, amongst other things, the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the total membership of the provincial assembly and there may be strong objections to such absorption both in NWFP and in FATA. Article 247(6) of the constitution requires the president to ascertain the views of the people of the tribal areas, as represented in tribal jirgas, before directing that any tribal area shall cease to be a tribal area.The next step that could be taken is the extension of the Political Parties Act to FATA. If the citizens of FATA are to be encouraged to think and go beyond tribal loyalties then they must have the right and opportunity to form and join political parties. Another change that should be made immediately is the establishment of a separate High Court or Chief Court for FATA and to give to such court the power to enforce fundamental rights and to serve as an appellate court from tribal jirgas in place of the appellate tribunal which is part of the FATA administration. The "decision" to repeal the Frontier Crimes Regulations requires re-consideration. The view of the tribal jirgas and perhaps an elected FATA Legislative Council and the MNAs and senators from FATA should be taken into account before this is done. At the field level the administrative structure surely needs the re-establishment of the authority of the political agents backed by a sizeably larger frontier corps. As in the rest of Pakistan the armed forces should be available in aid of civil power and not otherwise except of course to prevent cross-border movement of arms and armed personnel in either direction.

Thursday, July 3, 2008

What Does Islam Say about Terrorism?

Description: A look at the various principles of Islam which show that Islam is truly a mercy to the world, and the indiscriminate violence and terrorism is not condoned by the religion.
Islam, a religion of mercy, does not permit terrorism. In the Quran, God has said:

“God does not forbid you from showing kindness and dealing justly with those who have not fought you about religion and have not driven you out of your homes. God loves just dealers.” (Quran 60:8)

The Prophet Muhammad, may the mercy and blessings of God be upon him, used to prohibit soldiers from killing women and children,and he would advise them: “...Do not betray, do not be excessive, do not kill a newborn child.”
And he also said: “Whoever has killed a person having a treaty with the Muslims shall not smell the fragrance of Paradise, though its fragrance is found for a span of forty years.”

Also, the Prophet Muhammad has forbidden punishment with fire.
He once listed murder as the second of the major sins,and he even warned that on the Day of Judgment, “The first cases to be adjudicated between people on the Day of Judgment will be those of bloodshed.”

Muslims are even encouraged to be kind to animals and are forbidden to hurt them. Once the Prophet Muhammad said: “A woman was punished because she imprisoned a cat until it died. On account of this, she was doomed to Hell. While she imprisoned it, she did not give the cat food or drink, nor did she free it to eat the insects of the earth.”

He also said that a man gave a very thirsty dog a drink, so God forgave his sins for this action. The Prophet, may the mercy and blessings of God be upon him, was asked, “Messenger of God, are we rewarded for kindness towards animals?” He said: “There is a reward for kindness to every living animal or human.”
Additionally, while taking the life of an animal for food, Muslims are commanded to do so in a manner that causes the least amount of fright and suffering possible. The Prophet Muhammad said: “When you slaughter an animal, do so in the best way. One should sharpen his knife to reduce the suffering of the animal.”

In light of these and other Islamic texts, the act of inciting terror in the hearts of defenseless civilians, the wholesale destruction of buildings and properties, the bombing and maiming of innocent men, women, and children are all forbidden and detestable acts according to Islam and the Muslims. Muslims follow a religion of peace, mercy, and forgiveness, and the vast majority have nothing to do with the violent events some have associated with Muslims. If an individual Muslim were to commit an act of terrorism, this person would be guilty of violating the laws of Islam.

Footnotes:
Narrated in Saheeh Muslim, #1744, and Saheeh Al-Bukhari, #3015.
Narrated in Saheeh Muslim, #1731, and Al-Tirmizi, #1408.
Narrated in Saheeh Al-Bukhari, #3166, and Ibn Majah, #2686.
Narrated in Abu-Dawood, #2675.
Narrated in Saheeh Al-Bukhari, #6871, and Saheeh Muslim, #88.
This means killing and injuring.
Narrated in Saheeh Muslim, #1678, and Saheeh Al-Bukhari, #6533.
Narrated in Saheeh Muslim, #2422, and Saheeh Al-Bukhari, #2365.
Narrated in Saheeh Muslim, #2244, and Saheeh Al-Bukhari, #2466.
Narrated in Saheeh Muslim, #1955, and Al-Tirmizi, #1409.

MAULANA OBAIDULLAH SINDHI

Maulana Obaidullah Sindhi was born on March 1, 1872 as Buta Singh in a Sikh family of District Sialkot. His father Rana Singh died before his birth and he was brought up by his maternal uncle at Jampur (District Dera Ghazi Khan). Here he was deeply influenced by the writings of muslim scholars and embraced Islam at the age of 15. He left his home and settled in Sindh, where he became a disciple of a sufi, Hafiz Mohammad siddiQ Barchondvi.
In 1889. he joined the famous Dar-ul-U1oom of Deoband from where he graduated with honours. At Deoband Shaikh- ul-Hind Maulana Mahmudul Hasan and some other teachers influenced him.

He started his career as a teacher In 1908, he came back to Deoband and was entrusted with the programme of Jamiat-ul-Ansar, the organization started by the Shaikh-ul-Hind
In 1913, he was asked to go and work in the Nizarat-ul-Moarif at Delhi. He taught the Holy Quran to English educated youth in the Fatehpuri Mosque.

In 1915, he went to Afghanistan with the object of promoting a Muslim attack on India which would synchronize with a Muslim uprising against the British Rule in Indo-Pakistan Sub-continent. Maulana Obaidullah was actively involved in the historic 'Reshmi Roomal (Silk Letter) Movement'.
From Afghanistan he travelled to Turkey and Russia. All his attempts were directed towards forging international Muslim unity i.e., unity of the Muslim Ummah irrespective of the barriers of nationalities and linguistic differences.

He returned to India in 1939, where he established a religious school at Denpur (Disbict Khanpur).
He died on August 21, 1944.
He wrote his autobiography in Urdu titled 'Zaati Diary'. His oilier works are 'Safarnama-i-Kabul', 'Shah Waliullah Aur Unki Siyasi Tahreek', 'Shah Waliullah aUf UnkaFalsafa' and 'Khutbat-i-Maulana Obaidullah Sindhi'

Wednesday, July 2, 2008

BRIEF LIFE SKETCH

Muhammad Iqbal (1877-1938) is one of the preeminent writers of the Indo-Pakistan subcontinent. Indeed, the attention he has received from numerous writers, translators, and critics from Western as well as Islamic countries testifies to his stature as a world literary figure. While his primary reputation is that of a poet, Iqbal has not lacked admirers for his philosophical thought. He has in fact been called “the most serious Muslim philosophical thinker of modem times.” The frequently used appellation of “poet-philosopher” is thus well deserved. The hyphen in the phrase is all-important: Iqbal’s poetry and philosophy do not exist in isolation from each other; they are integrally related, his poetry serving as a vehicle for his thought. Iqbal wrote poetry in Urdu and Persian, and several collections in each language exist. In the following page a life-sketch of Iqbal is followed by a brief treatment of some of the major themes and literary features of his poetry.

Iqbal was born in Sialkot, in the present-day province of the Punjab in Pakistan, in 1877. He received his early education in that city, where one of his teachers was Mir Hasan, an accomplished scholar who commanded a knowledge of several Islamic languages. Mir Hasan gave Iqbal a thorough training in the rich Islamic literary tradition. His influence on Iqbal was formative. Many years later (1922), when the English governor of the Punjab proposed to the British Crown that Iqbal be knighted in acknowledgment of his literary accomplishments, Iqbal asked that Mir Hasan also be awarded a title. To the governor’s remark that Mir Hasan had not authored any books, Iqbal responded that he, Iqbal, was the book Mir Hasan had produced. Mir Hasan received the title of Shams al-’Ulama’ (“Sun of Scholars”).

For higher education Iqbal went to Lahore (1895), where he enrolled in Government College, getting, in 1899, an MA in philosophy; he had already obtained a degree in law (1898). In Lahore, a major center of academic and literary activity, Iqbal soon made a name for himself as a poet. One of the teachers of Government College Iqbal admired most was Sir Thomas Arnold. Arnold, too, had great affection for Iqbal, he helped Iqbal in his career as a teacher and also encouraged him to undertake several research projects. When Arnold returned to England in 1904, Iqbal wrote a touching poem in which he expressed his resolve to follow Arnold to England. The very next year, in fact, Iqbal left for study at Cambridge. His choice of Cambridge was probably dictated by the fact that Cambridge was reputed for the study not only of European philosophy but also of Arabic and Persian. In his three years of stay abroad, Iqbal obtained a BA from Cambridge (1906), qualified as a barrister at London’s Middle Temple (1906), and earned a PhD from Munich University (1908).

After returning to Lahore in 1908, Iqbal taught philosophy at Government College for a few years. In 1911 he resigned from government service and set up legal practice. Meanwhile he continued to write poetry in Urdu and Persian, Asrar-i Khudi (Persian) was published in 1915. Translated into English as The Secrets of the Self (1920) by Professor Reynold Nicholson of Cambridge, the book introduced Iqbal to the West. Asrar-i Khudi was followed by several other volumes: Rumuz-i Bikhudi (1918), Payam-i Mashriq (1923), Bang-i Dara (1924), Zabur-i ‘Ajam (1927), Javid Namah (1932), Musafir (1936), Zarb-i Kalim (1937), and Armaghan-i Hijaz (1938, posthumously). Iqbal wrote prose also. His doctoral thesis, The Development of Metaphysics in Persia, was published in 1908, and his Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam (with a 7th chapter added to the original set of six lectures, first published in 1930), in 1934. Many of Iqbal’s poetical works have been rendered into foreign languages, including English, German, Italian, Russian, Czechoslovakian, Arabic, and Turkish. His works have also spawned a vast amount of critical literature in many languages.

Although his main interests were scholarly, Iqbal was not unconcerned with the political situation of the, country and the political fortunes of the Muslim community of India. Already in 1908, while in England, he had been chosen as a member of the executive council of the newly established British branch of the Indian Muslim League. In 1931 and 1932 he represented the Muslims of India in the Round Table Conferences held in England to discuss the issue of the political future of India. And in a 1930 lecture Iqbal suggested the creation of a separate homeland for the Muslims of India. Iqbal died (1938) before the creation of Pakistan (1947), but it was his teaching that “spiritually ... has been the chief force behind the creation of Pakistan.” He is the national poet of Pakistan.

A detailed discussion of the thematic and literary features of Iqbal’s poetry is not be undertaken here. A few general points may, however, be made.A reader of Iqbal’s poetry is struck by its sheer thematic variety. Iqbal was deeply interested in the issues that have exercised the best minds of the human race—the issues of the meaning of life, change and constancy, freedom and determinism, survival and progress, the relation between the body and the soul, the conflict between reason and emotion, evil and suffering, the position and role of human beings in the universe—and in his poetry he deals with these and other issues. He had also read widely in history, philosophy, literature, mysticism, and politics, and, again, his catholic interests are reflected in his poetry.

Iqbal celebrates humanity, in more than one sense. On one level he shows broad acceptance for humanity. In “The Story of Adam”, the protagonist, Adam, plays a variety of roles-those of prophet, thinker, reformer, scientist, inventor, astronomer, martyr, and iconoclast. Adam in this poem is not simply a religious figure belonging to a certain tradition, but represents the whole of humankind. On another level, Iqbal takes pride in being human and has no desire to partake of the godhead of God. To be God is to have concerns and worries that would give one a headache, but to be human is to have that sweet pain called heartache. Humans can hold their heads high in view of their achievements in the world to which they were banished from paradise: if God has made the night, then humans have made the lamp, and if God has made deserts and mountains, then humans have made parks and meadows (“A Dialogue Between God and Man,”). Humans must, therefore, strive to be perfect qua humans, and that is a goal yet to be achieved.

The theme of humanity is closely linked in Iqbal with that of khudi (literally, “selfhood”). Khudi is a complex thought in Iqbal. Broadly speaking, it represents the principle of the inner self with an urge to manifest itself Societies as well as individuals have khudi, and it is on the development or suppression of one’s or failure in the world depends, khudi that one’s success the khudi of slaves, for example, is moribund.Recognition, discovery, cultivation, and assertion of their khudi should, therefore, be the aim of humans. Iqbal’s critique of Muslim societies is predicated on the assumption that these societies have lost their khudi or have allowed it to become seriously impaired. The best way to understand Iqbal’s concept of khudi is by reading poems in which he discusses the subject.

Perfection, or rather limitless perfection, is a frequently occurring motif in Iqbal’s poetry. “I seek the end of that which has no end,” says Iqbal in “The Houri and the Poet”, and, in the same poem: “From the spark I seek a star, from the star a sun.” Iqbal sees no end to human potentialities. He wishes humans to embark on a never-ending journey of discovery, and to this end emphasizes the importance of action. Constant action and perpetual movement are in fact the only guarantee of survival in the world. Nations fall behind when they cease to be dynamic and start preferring a life of idle speculation over one of purposive action.But the quest for perfection can give rise to irony. Irony, in fact, fills human life, for while they have been imbued with the desire to achieve perfection, humans have been denied the ability to achieve it in practice. The poems “Man”, “Solitude”, and “The Dew and the Stars” discuss several aspects of the irony of human life. The poem, “The Story of Adam,” though it ends on a more optimistic note, yet implies that it takes humans a long time to discover the most important secret of existence.

“The heart has its reasons, of which reason is ignorant,” says Pascal. Iqbal, who frequently speaks of the conflict of the head and the heart, would agree, though he would add that while the conflict exists, it does not have to. More often than not it is reason (or the intellect) that belittles the heart (or intuition), but both are essential to a harmonious life; ideally, then, reason and the heart should cooperate rather than clash.Although he has wide-ranging interests, Iqbal essentially belongs to, and speaks from within, the Islamic tradition, employing, for his purposes, the historical, religious, philosophical, and literary resources of that tradition. A full appreciation of Iqbal requires an understanding of these resources, and the notes and commentaries in this volume elucidate Iqbal’s use of them.Iqbal held to the doctrine of art for life’s sake. Acutely aware of the problems of Muslim decadence and backwardness, Iqbal takes it upon himself to shake the Muslims of India and other countries out of their lethargy, urging them to take the path of progress, so that they can gain an honorable position in the polity of nations, He uses the medium of poetry to arouse socio-religious consciousness among Muslims. As a result, Islamic religious and social themes predominate in his poetry. But Iqbal’s vision of a revived religion is far from conservative. He is sharply critical of many of the institutions of historic Islam (of the institution of monarchy, for example), and his vision of a new world derives from the Islamic notions of egalitarianism and social justice. He rejects dogmatism in religion, advocates rethinking of the Islamic intellectual heritage, and stands for the establishment of a forward-looking community. But the conviction of art for life’s sake never allows Iqbal’s poetry to degenerate into bland or crass propaganda. The worldwide acclamation he has won is proof that Iqbal’s strength consists in writing purpose poetry of the highest artistic standards.

Ultimately, however, the secret of the appeal of Iqbal’s poetry lies in the personality behind that poetry. Whether he is dealing with a broadly humanistic or a specifically Islamic theme, Iqbal views it from a unique perspective. Consider his boldly critical attitude toward certain aspects of the received tradition, an attitude reflected, for example, in the poems referred above. Unlike almost any other poet in the Islamic tradition, Iqbal enters into a dialogue with God, raising issues the orthodox would consider disturbing. He asks whether Adam’s expulsion from heaven has turned out to be Adam’s loss or God’s own; he challenges God to speak to him face to face rather than through messengers, and, noting the discrepancy between the boundlessness of human ambition and the limitedness of the resources put at humans’ disposal, he asks God whether His experiment involving Adam is to be taken seriously. Iqbal’s view of the role of Satan in the world is also highly intriguing and, as one would expect, highly unconventional (see “Conquest of Nature” and “Gabriel and Iblis”).

A notable thing about Iqbal’s perspective is ambiguity, a typical modem quality. Especially when he is talking about metaphysical issues, Iqbal raises some difficult questions, without providing a single “valid” answer. In “Paradise Lost and Regained” the question whether Adam should have sinned or not (each scenario being theoretically defensible) is not answered by Iqbal. In “Gabriel and Iblis” we are left to wonder about Iqbal’s own view of Iblis’ self-justification. And in “Solitude” we cannot be certain why God smiles.In several places Iqbal talks about himself about his Eastern background and Western education, and the contradictions of his own personality; his conviction that his study of historic Islam had furnished him with certain valuable insights which he must share with his people; his hope that his message will spread across the Muslim world, and his apprehension that he will be misunderstood or appreciated for the wrong reasons. Here it may be added that the various attempts made to identify (or label) Iqbal as a Sufi or an orthodox Muslim, as a radical or a reactionary are wide of the mark because Iqbal is too large a figure to fit any narrow, procrustean category; he demands and deserves attention on his own terms.

Iqbal had a fine sense of the dramatic, and in his poetry he frequently employs dramatic techniques. Many of his poems are structured like a play, with the first half of the poem building a tension or conflict that is resolved, or raising a question that is answered, in the second half Examples are “Gabriel and Iblis”, “The Dew and the Stars”, “The Houri and the Poet” and “Fatimah bint ‘Abdullah”. Many poems are dialogues, with well-argued positions taken by the interlocutors (“A Dialogue Between God and Man”, “The Dew and the Stars”, “Reason and Heart” and “A Dialogue Between Knowledge and Love”; also the fables). Some poems are one-sided dialogues or monologues (“Give Me Another Adversary”, “The Falcon’s Advice to Its Youngster”). Again, Iqbal carefully weaves the “plot” of a poem, arousing the reader’s curiosity, dropping seemingly casual hints that turn out to be prophetic, providing flashback, and saving his masterstroke for the end. Two excellent examples are “The Night and the Poet” and “The Houri and the Poet”.Iqbal has some favorite images and motifs. The eagle is Iqbal’s favorite bird, and the tulip his favorite flower. We will here say a few words about the tulip. The tulip is a pretty flower, but, when it grows in the desert (Lala’-i sahra’), it combines strength with beauty, for it then represents the assertion of one’s self (khudi) in the face of hostile circumstances. The tulip owes its splendor not to an outside source but to the “scar” inside its heart, its glow being indigenous to it, as befits a flower with a khudi of its own. The tulip is thus a “model” for individuals and nations to follow. In one of his quatrains (“Freedom and Determinism and Philosophy of History”), speaking of the difficult circumstances that alone give birth to new nations, Iqbal says: “From mountains and deserts do nations arise.” Although Iqbal does not mention the tulip in this quatrain, it would not be far-fetched to suggest that, conceptually, Iqbal here has the desert tulip in mind. The cup-shaped flower suggests to Iqbal’s mind several analogies, and in one piece (“Locke, Kant, and Bergson,”) Iqbal, makes consistent use of the tulip image to describe and analyze complex philosophical ideas. It is in view of the deep significance of the flower in Iqbal’s poetry that I have chosen Tulip in the Desert as the title of my volume of translations (Mustansir Mir, Tulip in the Desert, Hurst and Company, London, 2000). The images of the eagle and the tulip illustrate how Iqbal adds to the native literary tradition or makes an innovative use of that tradition (the tulip). Another example in this connection is that of the moth. In Persian and Urdu poetry the moth represents the devoted and self-immolating lover. Like the moth, which keeps circling the light, the lover (a male) desires to stay close to the beloved (a female). But in Iqbal, typically, the moth often represent a reprehensible rather than a praiseworthy quality: the shining light it is in love with is not its own. The moth is to be contrasted with another, the firefly, which, though it has a weak light, can at least call this light its own. The firefly, in other words, is possessed of khudi, but the moth has no khudi. Iqbal often uses a series of images to convey a thought, producing a cumulative effect. In “Fatimah bint -Abdullah,” for example, he uses no fewer than four images to express the idea that, even in its present age of decadence, the Muslim Community can produce individuals of exceptional caliber:O that our autumn-stricken garden had A flower-bud like this! O that in our ashes would be found, O Lord, A spark like this! In our desert is hidden many a deer still. In the spent clouds lies dormant still Many a flash of lightning.Iqbal is capable of writing biting satire. Two examples are: “Give Me Another Adversary”, in which Satan argues that he deserves a better rival than Adam, and “Scorpion Land,” which criticizes slave mentality.