Tag Archives: War on terror

Why the west’s view of the Saudis is shifting

The rise of Isis, human rights concerns and less dependence on Arab oil are triggering change

By Gideon Rachman

Something is changing in the west’s relationship with Saudi Arabia. You can read it in the newspapers. You can hear it from politicians. And you can see it in shifts in policy.

Read more » FT
L
earn more » See more » http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a33c5e6c-9ccc-11e5-8ce1-f6219b685d74.html#axzz3tcXc74Ga

See more » http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a33c5e6c-9ccc-11e5-8ce1-f6219b685d74.html#ixzz3tlQsfRW1

To really combat terror, end support for Saudi Arabia – Owen Jones

Ramped up rhetoric on security makes no sense so long as the west cosies up to dictatorships that support fundamentalism

The so-called war on terror is nearly 13 years old, but which rational human being will be cheering its success? We’ve had crackdowns on civil liberties across the world, tabloid-fanned generalisations about Muslims and, of course, military interventions whose consequences have ranged from the disastrous to the catastrophic. And where have we ended up? Wars that Britons believe have made them less safe; jihadists too extreme even for al-Qaida’s tastes running amok in Iraq and Syria; and nations like Libya succumbing to Islamist militias. There are failures, and then there are calamities.

But as the British government ramps up the terror alert to “severe” and yet moreanti-terror legislation is proposed, some reflection after 13 years of disaster is surely needed. One element has been missing, and that is the west’s relationship with Middle Eastern dictatorships that have played a pernicious role in the rise of Islamist fundamentalist terrorism. And no wonder: the west is militarily, economically and diplomatically allied with these often brutal regimes, and our media all too often reflects the foreign policy objectives of our governments.

Take Qatar. There is evidence that, as the US magazine The Atlantic puts it, “Qatar’s military and economic largesse has made its way to Jabhat al-Nusra”, an al-Qaida group operating in Syria. Less than two weeks ago, Germany’s development minister, Gerd Mueller, was slapped down after pointing the finger at Qatar for funding Islamic State (Isis).

Read more » the guardian
See more » http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/31/combat-terror-end-support-saudi-arabia-dictatorships-fundamentalism

As it happened: PM Modi’s UAE visit

PM Modi on Monday addressed a packed house at the Dubai Cricket Stadium, sending out a strong message on terror and reaching out to Indians across the globe.

Key Highlights

We have undertaken an extensive infrastructure development programme on the eastern coast of India.10:21 PM
Our government is visible everywhere and all the time.10:09 PM
Good Taliban and bad Taliban, good terrorism and bad terrorism won’t work any more. People have to decide if they are with humanity or with terrorism.10:01 PM
The reason why the world looks at India differently today is the will-power of 1.25 crore Indians.09:52 PM
A clear indication against terrorism has been given in a united voice from UAE.09:48 PM
The UAE Crown Prince has agreed to invest Rs 4.5 lakh crores in India.09:44 PM
People who are associated with Abu Dhabi know how big a decision it is to give land for a temple here. The Crown Prince deserves a standing ovation for it.09:40 PM
People from Kerala are there in large numbers. And I am specially talking about them due to the New Year festival today.

News courtesy: The Times of India
Read more » http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/PM-Modi’s-UAE-visit/liveblog/48507741.cms

Barack Obama says US ‘at war with those perverting Islam’

US President Barack Obama says the US is “not at war with Islam – we are at war with the people who have perverted Islam”.

He was speaking to representatives from 60 nations attending a three-day event on extremism that follows attacks in Denmark and France.

Mr Obama said the world had to confront the ideologies that radicalise people.

He said those heading groups like Islamic State and al-Qaeda were not religious leaders but terrorists.

Mr Obama said associating Islamic State or al-Qaeda with Islam would be buying into the propaganda of those groups, challenging critics who have questioned him for not describing recent attacks as the work of “Islamic radicals”.

Read more » BBC
See more » http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-3152321

 

Terror attacks cannot save Islam’s ‘honour’

By Husain Haqqani

Soon after the terrorist attack on Charlie Hebdo, Islamist sympathizers on social media unleashed familiar rhetoric. AlQaida and ISIS supporters used Arabic language hashtags like “our revenge for the messenger (Muhammad)”, “Paris is the messenger (Muhammad)”, “Paris is Burning”, “Paris under Fire” and “Lions of Tawheed (monotheism)”. One self-styled jihadi tweeted, “This is the first reaction. You’ll not live in safety again.” Another said: “This proves that the Islamic State can strike deep in Europe whenever it wishes.” Someone styling himself as Abu Sari alIraqi put up a graphic of the Islamic State’s black flag on the Eiffel Tower, with the slogan in French: “We are everywhere.”

Such bombast reflects the emptiness of the Islamist dream. The killing of unarmed cartoonists and journalists is hardly an act of courage. Paris did not, in fact, burn and this latest act of terrorism mobilized the French against the jihadis just as terrorist attacks in New York, London and Mumbai had united people against them in the past.

More important, terrorism is unlikely to dissuade anyone so inclined to refrain from insulting Islam, its prophet or Muslims. Like followers of any other religion, Muslims do not like insults to their faith or to their prophet. But threats and actual attacks of the type witnessed in Paris last week have been limited to Islamists.

Contrary to the assertion of some, such violence has nothing to do with recent wars or the policies of great powers in Iraq, Afghanistan or Syria. A man named Alam Din from Lahore was proclaimed a ‘ghazi’ for killing a Hindu publisher of a book insulting Prophet Muhammad in 1929. Salman Rushdie’s ‘Satanic Verses’ prompted fatwas and violent protests 50 years later. These incidents cannot be attributed as reaction to US military intervention.

Of course, not all of the world’s over one billion Muslims react to real or perceived insults to their religion in the same manner. Believers in different deities and prophets have often slandered each other’s faiths. Islam has endured its share of criticism and abuse over the centuries, especially from Christians, against whom they fought the Crusades and the Ottoman wars.

But in earlier times, Muslims responded to religious affronts by pointing out flaws in other religions and outlining their own perfect faith. Their armies were violent but so were the armies of others. When Muslim emperors ruled over large non-Muslim populations, preachers and Sufi mystics worked to win converts to Islam. There is no record in those days of targeted attacks in retaliation for blasphemy against the prophet or Islam in distant lands.

The phenomenon of violent outrage over insults to Islam seems to have started during western colonial rule, with Muslim politicians seeking issues to mobilize their constituents. Contemporary jihadism seems to have grown out of the slogan ‘Islam in Danger’, which has been periodically invoked as a rallying cry for Islamist politics.

Ironically, it is the Islamists who draw attention to otherwise obscure attacks on Islam and then use those to muster popular support. The reaction makes more people aware of a book like Rushdie’s or a film like ‘The Innocence of Muhammad’. Charlie Hebdo regularly published only 45,000 copies but will likely be read by hundreds of thousands now.

The violence over ‘Islam’s honour’ is a function of the collective Muslim narrative of grievance. Decline, weakness, impotence, and helplessness are phrases most frequently repeated in the speeches and writings of today’s Muslim leaders. The view is shared by Islamists, who consider Islam a political ideology , and other Muslims who don’t. The terrorists are just the most extreme element among the Islamists. As a community , Muslims are obsessed with their past pre-eminence, which stands in stark contrast with their current weakness. The bravado of beheading blasphemers and thinking a terrorist attack can change the global order are ways of reclaiming a glory that is vividly recalled but not seen by Muslims in recent centuries.

Like all national and community narratives, this one has elements of truth. But it is equally true that Muslims have made no serious effort to understand the causes and remedies of their decline over the past 300 years. Outrage, resentment and violence -and the conspiracy theories that inform them -serve as palliatives for an Ummah that reads little, writes even less, hasn’t invented much in recent centuries, and wields little political or military power in the contemporary world. Dealing with the causes of Muslim decline, not random or orchestrated acts of terrorism, would be the real way forward in saving Muslims from dishonour.

The writer is former Pakistan envoy to the US.

Courtesy: The Times of India
Learn more » http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/stoi/all-that-matters/Terror-attacks-cannot-save-Islams-honour/articleshow/45839372.cms

Win the war not just the battle

By Ayesha Siddiqa

It seems that Pakistan is set on the path of becoming a country where all critical decisions will be either taken or influenced by the military, and the civilian leadership will merely fill in the blank or be the guinea pig to go after when someone is needed to blame. The security apparatus might as well be in charge since the combined leadership, irrespective of party affiliation and relative respectability, politely hummed and hawed and accepted military courts as fait accompli. It is almost humorous to think of parties who claim to have agreed to the solution after being promised that these courts will not be used against them, or that their use will be controlled. An even sadder fact is that barring the enlightened civil society, which understands the long-term impact of such developments, the bulk of civil society, or even the general public in certain parts of Pakistan, has a ‘can’t-be-bothered’ attitude towards democracy, which they now consider to be of secondary importance. In the words of an acquaintance, “First, let’s have security and we will take care of democracy later.” The obvious problem with this system is that responsibility will be divided and one wouldn’t know who to blame.

Continue reading Win the war not just the battle

Pakistan Is Its Own Worst Enemy

Pakistan has literally become a delusional country ...
Pakistan has literally become a delusional country …

By 

My country Pakistan is still reeling from the shock and disbelief due to the December 16 tragedy in which more than 130 children died. Over the years, Pakistan has suffered a lot due to terrorism as countless people have lost their lives. But what happened on the December 16 was extremely dark and gory even by Pakistani standard.

And yet whatever happened on that fateful day is in many ways a result of our own faults. And in this journey towards mayhem, it is not just the Pakistani state but the general public also has played a prominent part.

Nothing will change until this narrative changes and our mindset which accommodates it changes. Pakistan has to realize that it is its own worst enemy.

What happened on December 16 or has been happening over the years is the direct consequence of using religion as a political tool to achieve some strategic objectives. For many years Pakistani state has used religious militant groups for achieving “strategic” objectives and in the process it has always taken it for granted that one cannot feed crocodiles and expect that they will only attack the “enemy”.

Although Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) is different from Afghan Taliban — as the latter is often categorized as “good” Taliban — but the fact is that even if different, both have mutated from the same template. TTP just like Afghan Taliban is a militant organization which seeks motivation from religion and aims to implement a very strict form of religious code.

But state’s practice of supporting such groups is just one part of the story. The fact that public opinion has never been really against such groups is something which is even more troublesome. Over the years, Pakistani public has been in strange form of denial and has always considered militants such as the TTP as merely reacting to U.S. presence in Afghanistan and its policy of carrying drone attacks.

Much more than anything else, it is this mindset which is deeply problematic. Even when it became obvious that TTP was killing and even accepting responsibility, Pakistan’s response was of denial. Some kept on calling it propaganda against Taliban to defame them while others kept on giving apologetic defense to them by calling their inhuman atrocities as “reaction”.

Continue reading Pakistan Is Its Own Worst Enemy

No more excuses for Taliban violence, Bhutto heir tells Pakistan’s leaders

Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, 25, says prime minister and Imran Khan letting down nation by not backing firm military action

By  in Mohenjodaro

Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, the youthful heir apparent to one of south Asia’s most famous dynasties, has launched a scathing attack on his political opponents who he said must stop “making excuses” for Taliban violence.

The 25-year-old son of the assassinated prime minister Benazir Bhutto said Nawaz Sharif, the country’s current leader, and the opposition politician Imran Khan, were “letting down the people” by not backing firm military action against the Taliban.

“Perhaps they are suffering from Stockholm Syndrome,” Bhutto Zardari said, referring to cases of hostages who sympathise with or even assist their captors. “There is no reason why the national leaders, the so-called leaders, should not speak out against people who are murdering our citizens, murdering our armed forces and claiming responsibility.”

The remarks are likely to further burnish his reputation as both a brash new arrival on Pakistan‘s political scene but also the most outspoken politician in the country on the issue of militancy and extremism.

He does not sit in parliament, but wields significant influence over the Pakistan People’s party (PPP), of which he is “patron in chief”. The party has been led in the past by his grandfather, his mother – who was killed while campaigning in 2007 – and his father, Asif Ali Zardari. Khan and other right-wing politicians have been criticised for handling the Pakistani Taliban with kid gloves, in a so-far unsuccessful bid to lure them into peace talks.

On Saturday the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan ( TTP ), as the country’s deadly coalition of militants is known, signalled its appreciation of Khan’s approach by announcing the movement wanted him to sit on a committee with four extremist clerics known to sympathise with militant aims. The TTP said Khan and the others could represent its interests in peace talks with the government.

Khan brushed off the embarrassing endorsement, saying “the TTP should select their own Taliban representatives for the peace talks”.

Even mass-casualty suicide attacks on civilians have at times elicited only meek condemnations. Many politicians are reluctant even to identify the culprits as the TTP.

Bhutto Zardari said the tactic had been disastrous, emboldening extremists to target civilians, including Malala Yousafzai, the schoolgirl education activist who nearly died in 2012 after being shot in the head by a Taliban assassin. “This is why people like Malala become targets because the politicians, or the so-called leaders of this country, can’t find the courage to speak out when a 16-year-old girl could. If we all speak in one voice, they can’t kill us all,” he said.

The TTP has used a highly effective intimidation campaign against liberal and left-leaning political parties and journalists to silence many of its natural critics. Bhutto Zardari said he could speak out only because of the vast security operation that surrounds him at all times and heavily restricts his travel in Pakistan, where he spends much of his time at his fortress-like family compound in Karachi.

“I have a lot of security – I lost my mother to the Taliban because of a lack of security – and that explains partly why I can be so vocal,” he said. “But so does Imran Khan. Nawaz Sharif is the prime minister of Pakistan, Shahbaz Sharif is the chief minister of Punjab. They all have more security than I do. They have no excuse.”

In the past Khan has said strident rhetoric might endanger the lives of his supporters and party activists. Bhutto Zardari has shown no such caution, even though he hopes thousands of members of the public will be attracted to numerous cultural events he has organised across Sindhin the coming weeks. They are part of a festival he has promoted as a deliberate challenge to extremists and militants he derisively calls “cavemen”.

Read more » The Guardian
See more » http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/02/taliban-violence-excuses-bilawal-bhutto-zardini-pakistan-military-action

Pakistan’s Tolerance of Jihadis Backfires Badly

By 

Pakistanis are still grappling with the tragedy of the Taliban attack on a school in Peshawar that left at least 141 people, most of them children, dead and scores injured. There has been an outpouring of grief internationally, and the Pakistani public is visibly outraged. But the question being widely asked is whether Pakistan’s military and political leaders can transform grief and outrage into a clear policy that would rid the country of its reputation as both a victim of and magnet for terrorists.

Even before this incident, Pakistan had one of the highest casualty rates at the hand of terrorists. About 19,700 civilians and 6,000 security force personnel have been reported killed in terrorism related violence in Pakistan since 2003. But the country refuses to develop a comprehensive approach to fighting or containing the 33-odd terrorist groups believed to be operating on Pakistani soil.

“The question being widely asked is whether Pakistan’s military and political leaders can transform grief and outrage into a clear policy that would rid the country of its reputation as both a victim of and magnet for terrorists.”

The latest attack is the Taliban’s response to the Pakistan army’s military operation against the terrorist safe haven in North Waziristan, part of the tribal region along the border with Afghanistan. Jihadis from all over the world had congregated in the tribal areas to fight as Mujahedeen against the Soviets during the 1980s. After the Soviets left, Pakistan used the militants for its own objectives of expanding Pakistani influence in Afghanistan, leading to the rise of the Taliban.

Read more » Huffington Post
See more » http://www.huffingtonpost.com/husain-haqqani/pakistan-school-attack-jihadis_b_6337112.html?utm_hp_ref=tw

New Film ‘Dirty Wars’ Exposes America’s Ruthless, Covert Wars

Jeremy Scahill’s new documentary reveals how dirty wars take innocent lives and make us less safe.

The United States deems Kabul, Afghanistan the center of the “war on terror.” The press corps and other embedded reporters, then, are limited to these borders.

But beyond these green (meaning safe, according to the U.S. govt.) streets of Afghanistan, lies a sea of red (dangerous) and black (Taliban-heavy) streets that go largely unexplored by journalists.

Yet, that’s exactly where investigative reporter Jeremy Scahill begins to delve in his new documentary Dirty Wars, directed by Rick Rowley.

Read more » AlterNet
http://www.alternet.org/media/review-jeremy-scahills-new-documentary-dirty-wars

“War on terror” gravy train!

by Omar Ali

My take on the Pak army’s current position oscillates between Taqi’s opinion and the opinion of Dr. Manzur Ejaz. I was fully behind Dr. Manzur Ejaz this morning. But its getting late at night and I just saw Kamran Khan and so maybe its time to put on a more pessimistic hat…

Rationally, Dr. Saheb is one hundred percent right. The army has a huge stake in Pakistan’s economy. Pakistan’s economy has no future if we are in a state of near-war and proxy war with India, Pakistan’s economy has even less of a future if NATO regards Pakistan as an enemy instead of an ally. India’s economy is growing rapidly. Peace will allow Pakistan to attach on India’s growth. Given its lower population density, reasonable infrastructure in Punjab and Karachi, relatively homogeneous heartland,and favorable location (Iran-India pipeline, central Asian transit trade, easier to ship things from Karachi to East Punjab than it is to go via Gujarat, etc.) Pakistan can actually start making serious money relatively quickly and that means the army will make money. China is also focused on economic growth and trade between India and China is exploding. Pakistan can get a share in all that. The peace dividend, in other words, is real and almost immediate.

Meanwhile, the jihadis are certifiably insane and are already a huge threat to the Pakistani state. America, NATO, Japan, Korea, all will pay good money to go after them and the job will take so many years, the army has no reason to worry that its “war on terror” gravy train will dry up anytime soon. Socially, Pakistan is not really ready for Jihadists rule. The jihadis have absolutely no workable program for a modern state….the case for ditching the jihadis and making peace with India seems open and shut. (Of course, INDIA may not cooperate either, but we are focusing right now on what the Pak army is thinking).

So are there some reasons to doubt this rational analysis?

1. The army may calculate (miscalculate in my opinion, but who said they cannot miscalculate?) that peace with India will deprive them of their ability to keep everyone else in Pakistan under their thumb. Or (even more stupidly) that it will deprive Pakistan of its reason for existence.

2. Some geniuses in NDU spend their life looking at rivers on the map and writing position papers about how Pakistan will shrivel and die if we don’t “have Kashmir”. Outsiders tend to think this his just the usual institute of strategic studies bullshit, but I have yet to meet an army officer who did not wholly or partly believe this.All sorts of other gory details about evil devious Hindu Brahmans and their determination to eat every last Muslim baby are added as needed. Again, outsiders tend to think this is “just propaganda” and expect that the army can distinguish between genuine maniacs like Babu Bajrangi and mainstream Indian politicians, but maybe the outsiders are giving the army too much credit? As you may know, even senior army officers seem to believe this propaganda by the time they have had a few drinks. This is an old hazard in the world of propaganda: the propagandists tend to fall for their own propaganda, especially when they live in some echo chamber where alternative views don’t get in anyway.

3. Some in the army and its “think tanks” (Shireen Mazari?) may think that it is more rational to destroy India before it becomes a serious power, and they may imagine that their BFFs in China actually want the same. It does’nt matter if Wen Jia bao doesnt actually think in these terms. What matters is that Shireen Mazari and General Tinpot bahadur imagine that the Chinese want this to happen. Dr. Manzur Ejaz is a sane person, but far too many Pakistani army officers are listening to Zaid Hamid and Ahmed Qureshi, not Dr Manzur Ejaz. What if they take those nutcases seriously?

4. The problem of true believers. Again, outsiders tend to think that Islam and the whole neo-wahabi paradigm are basically means to an end. Tools used by the Pak army to get its goodies, just like Republican candidates use evangelical Christianity. But what if a lot of people in high places actually believe that Allah is waiting for them to unite the Ummah and lead it in its eternal struggle against the infidels?

5. There is the issue of some events that don’t make a lot of sense if the jihadi option is actually being shut down: the determined refusal to launch frontal propaganda against the jihadis; the fact that ISI mouthpieces are constantly working to stir up anti-American and anti-Indian feelings and spreading confusion about the jihadi menace; The attack on Mumbai and the determined effort to present it as some kind of Indian plot;The mysterious survival of all senior jihadi leaders; Masood Azhar; Daood Ibrahim; Ahmed Saeed Shiekh; Haqqani network; Fazlullah, etc. And the line taken by army spokesmen like Kamran Khan; Shireen Mazari….too many loose ends…

5. Finally, there is the issue of nutcases. Every nation has some maniacs who need to be kept in asylums or employed in low level police jobs or as prison guards in Texas. If this kind of person makes it to some place where they can plan another attack on Mumbai, then all bets are off.

Dr. T has mentioned the Nazis. The sophisticated, highly civilized German nation ruined Germany and all of Europe in 12 short years of Nazi rule. At some level, Hitler’s initial actions seemed rational. Rationalists fully expected that he would also know where to draw the line. They were proven terribly wrong. What if the true believers are not thinking of means but ends?

I look forward to being proved wrong.

Courtesy: CRDP, Fri Jan 1, 2010

Taliban Justice- A pashtoon girl flogging by Taliban

by Khalid Hashmani, McLean, Virginia, USA

Taliban beating the girl mercilessly, click here to see the video
This is shocking and makes me ashamed that this is happening in the same country of which Sindh is also a part. I am angry as hell! These beasts and their supporters have no shame and their hearts are devoid of peaceful teachings of Islam. Beating mercilessly the poor woman on the pretext that “She came out of her house with another guy who was not her husband” is barbaric and it is obvious they do not live in past and are bent upon destruction and treating people with such cruelty.
May Allah punish these beasts if the government lacks the courage to save the wretched country of Pakistan from these barbarians.

Continue reading Taliban Justice- A pashtoon girl flogging by Taliban

Pakistan- War against terrorists: is it our war or is it not?

By Javed Qazi, Karachi, Sindh

Being a student of English legal system I had been through general principles of law. These are the principles quite universal in nature and the English or European Union courts basically upheld to these principles via encoded laws or if those legislatures made laws are not corresponding to these principles, the principles will prevail. The idea behind rule of law is basically to uphold the general principles and gauge the man made law through such spectrum.

The exceptional out of these principles that stroked me the most is the doctrine of proportionality: that obligation on individual can only be imposed when his rights are safeguarded. From this preview if we shall see to the present confusion the nation is fraught with that pertains to the war against religious extremists and that weather this war is our war or merely we are used by the US, we could visit to its breadth and width, and some how get to nearly a position to draw some outlines. That why is it my war? Or when the state is not mine why this war is mine? Or make the state protect my rights thus proprietary right I get in it and I will own this war too.

WHY IS IT OUR WAR?

At one place to say that it is not our war would completely be wide of the logical reasoning if we own our country. Since the very immediately these are the people, economy, culture and history which are under threat. These are Pakistanis not the Americans. This is not American land in which they have made terrorist hatcheries. This is not Americans Christian religion which has been hijacked. This is not American video shop for that barber shop, this is not the Marriot hotel located in Florida or this was the Benazir Bhutto not Hillary Clinton whom they had killed.

Yes after that if there is any one against whom these religious extremist are at war with is not the US alone but is it the entire world. I still do own the war of Chi Guerra in Latin America that was against the imperialism and one way was identical to that of Talibans etc for they had also used guerrillas war tactics but again they did not misused religion and using of guerilla tactics was limited to the level fighting with the rulers force; their places were hit not the common men¢s; not that they destroyed girls schools or they had put woman under the veil and were barbaric. They basically had faith on bringing the social security to every man not that the wanted to bring the rule as these Talibans and Al-Qaeda had brought in Afghanistan. I own a fight that could be fought against  imperialism and that is in the hands of sensible leaders not that blinds having a blind faith and the blind interpretation of Islam.

One can wonder! How religion could become a deadly weapon if it is exploited and the beginning in this respect was mad by the US when they installed usurper in Pakistan and passively was behind the civilian and secular and popular leader¢s murder by that dictator. It was not the murder of an individual; the dictator destroyed the whole plurality of the society. And then they installed another dictator to undo what Zia had done. But since dictator and peoples rules are antonyms of each other, this recently went dictator distorted the plurality in his own way. People had no trust in him rather they were more in support of Taliban as they had challenged to the dictator. It is ironical still there are many writers and the journalists like who are feeling that this is war against Imperialism and against their agents here in Pakistan.

I am afraid it is the way they hold that as the US exploited religion against the Soviet invasion let now the religion is used as weapon against the US.

This society has gone divided now that there are people and segments of society who being conservative and religious centric are not openly criticizing rather are sympathizers of Taliban etc. They are devoid to resolute and vow against this barbaric acts and the acts that weakens the country from within. The whole plurality the very fundamental element that society is made up of is being jeopardized by these religious terrorists. If such criminal silent is continued from their part and they hold that they are Jihadies and fighting against infidels and their agents in this country and that they are our strategic asset given to our geo political surroundings and thus provide us a strategic depth. This belief surely ends up at bringing this country to the brink of to get wiped off from the worlds map. God forbid!

We have to own this war for they have exploited our religion that beautiful religion of peace and love of the holy prophet that beautiful interpretation of it made by Moulana Jala-u-din Rumi. We will not allow letting this religion be hated by the world merely because of these few misguided and blind believers of Islam.

Why is it not our war?

As the facts suggest, still people are not participatory and active to feel it as our war in these critical days of economic crisis. Right from inception people have not been delivered the goods. Their schools, health and all the amenities providing institutions and the courts are not functioning. This is the country which had become security state from a welfare state. And back again to become a welfare state requires the same long decades as it can not be achieved overnight. These people will have ownership in the affairs of state only when the state will protect their rights.

The Musharaf¢s rule was per se illegal and delivered nothing to the commaon men and that is why also this encouraged and was reason of the growth in fundamentalism, people send their children to these madrassahs for they were providing these children bread cloth and shelter and the job as well if they turn up to be a jihadi and join their brigade.

Surely now there is civilian and democratic government but we shall remember always it is not an end or welfare per se; it is a medium to achieve that. Yes democracy has been achieved but not the welfare. The moment this democracy will get mature and will be able to deliver welfare to the people. That shall be the very reason per se in bringing end of these extremists which are basically an outcome of nepotism, despotic and corrupt regimes of the past. And equally of the American policy for this region and for the world at large is another cause.

The answer of this tragedy lies in the very fabric of rule of law and its fundamental principal of doctrine of proportionality. The lack of rights that were given to the people brought this tragedy to the country in particular and to the world at large. And the sustainable solution lies in the rule of law and application of the principle of proportionality so that the ownership of people may be created in the state and thus the death of this cancer that has gone in the veins of our society.

Courtesy: Sindhi e-lists/ e-groups.

Sep 24, 2008