Month: May 2009

Hello Everyone!

I hope you are all doing well and enjoying the spring! I wanted to tell you about my plans to volunteer in a local school in Bagamoyo, Tanzania, from mid-June to August. The program that I am volunteering through, called Cross-Cultural Solutions, helps situate volunteers year-around internationally in schools and hospitals in countries such as Ghana, Brazil, and Russia. The program works with the development of areas needing a constant supply of volunteers, while teaching volunteers about the culture and ways they can help the communities. I am writing this letter not only to ask for your help, but also to tell you about a fantastic opportunity that you and your friends and cousins can take advantage of. The program is legit and internationally established but isn’t cost-free. Cross-Cultural Solutions recommends sponsorships for the program cost, which doesn’t include transportation cost but covers the room, boarding, and medical coverage needed during my six-week stay, and I am trying to take advantage of the idea in order to help offset the cost. Please consider sponsoring me, as I would really appreciate any help you are able to give. And please forward this letter to other people.
To sponsor me or check out my page, click on the link: http://my.crossculturalsolutions.org/Login.aspx?username=bindas89
and then click on “Sponsor me Now” link at the bottom of the page. Thanks!

If you are interested in the program and would like to know more about it, you can visit the website at http://www.crossculturalsolutions.org/ or e-mail me at fayzan_g@berkeley.edu to know more. Thank you for reading this appeal, and have a good day!

Take care!
Fayzan

By B. R. Gowani

In the late 1980s, Pakistan became the first Muslim country in the world to elect a woman as its prime minister. In doing so, it was following the South Asian tradition of widows and daughters of prime ministers entering politics and taking a leading role. Sri Lanka’s Sirimavo Bandaranaike in 1960 became the first woman in the world to head a government. (Later, her daughter Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga became prime minister and president.) India had Indira Gandhi. Bangladesh is the only country in the world to have a woman prime minister and a woman as the main opposition leader. Both Begum Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina Wazed have changed roles twice.

And not surprisingly, none of the women did anything notable for women’s cause because they entered the men’s world and basically pursued similar policies. The South Asians can feel proud that four out of seven (or nine, if Afghanistan and Myanmar are included) countries have had women prime ministers. The pride ends there. Killing of women for dowry, in the name of honor or religion, and the acid disfiguring of women still exist and remain a cause for shame. And now there is a new menace in the form of Taliban who proudly video tape their barbarity and distribute it to create terror amongst the populous. They have succeeded; women (and men) have become fearful in Pakistan.

When women on streets are threatened by strangers to cover up; when taxi drivers warn women to cover up; when the videos of women and men being flogged by the wild militants circulate freely; when the videos of Taliban cutting off a man’s head and placing it on his body are rampant on the internet, who would not feel terrorized? Normal people would feel a chill run up their spine at witnessing this barbarity.

Whether the statements coming out of Washington pre- and post-Zardari visit, or the sudden revelation to Pakistan’s ruling class that the words of the Muslim militants are not to be trusted or the Pakistan military’s much delayed (Lal Masjid style) action is a last minute effort to save Pakistan or to make arrangements for Pakistan’s funeral-pyre, only time will tell.

Meanwhile, as the saying goes: the show must go on, that is, the people should cling to hope. In these delicate times, one has to do whatever is possible. One possibility which can be converted into reality is to form a women’s political party with a progressive agenda. In this endeavor, they can rely on the help of progressive men.
This is the right time for progressive women to come forward and form a political party because people are fed up with the current leaders: government and opposition.

These leaders have neither any democratic inclination nor are they enlightened enough to consider putting the country on a democratic and progressive path — much less, empowering women.

Nawaz Sharif is cozy with the Saudis and the Islamic parties. The US was thinking of planting him in the Prime Minister’s seat because Zardari is too weak. That plan will have to wait as Zardari* has said all the right things during his US visit. (His ambassador is a step ahead in the PR department and has gotten into the good books of the US ruling class.) Imran Khan has been kidnapped by the Holy Ghost, or more correctly, Hamid Gul, long ago. Khan’s anti-US stand has retarded his thinking to such an extent that he is incapable of seeing how would Pakistan fare under Taliban rule?

Yes, the root cause of the present crisis is the US government. But one should not forget that the Pakistan military’s mixing Islam and politics, and the feudal characters of the leaders are equally responsible. But are the Taliban any better?

There are a total of 76 or 22.5% women in Pakistan’s lower assembly and 17 or 17% in the upper assembly. Many of them may desire to do something to improve the condition of their sisters but their party leaders are the perpetual perpetrators of women’s inferior role in society.

The late Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto’s Pakistan Peoples Party is the only major liberal party. The women members of the party may have joined hoping that they’ll be able to get some of the reforms on women’s issues passed and implemented. Even when they do succeed and a bill is passed, to expect an implementation is unrealistic; especially when the country is going through uncertain times.

Sherry Rehman, the former Federal Minister for Information and Broadcasting, showed courage and resigned over differences with Zardari regarding the freedom of the press issue. She should now quit PPP and invite Lila Thadani, Sheema Kirmani, Zubeida Mustafa, Kamila Hayat, Attiya Dawood, Fatima Bhutto, Maleeha Lodhi, Fehmida Riaz, Kishwar Nahid, and other progressive women to form a women’s political party.

Pakistan already has the First Women Bank Limited since 1989 (created during Benazir’s first reign).

Now they can have their own political party. If in the parliament they are able to garner 10% of the votes, they can force the ruling or the opposition party to listen to women’s issues through their power to align with either of them in order to grant them a majority in the National Assembly and the Senate.

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

*He has become quite savvy as evident from the interviews. Talking to Spiegel Online he said: “I would advise you to read about the Afghan wars. It’s the way the Taliban, who are Pashtuns, fight: They take you on and then they melt into the mountains. And you often can’t tell who is who or what they are up to. These men are like old Indian chiefs in the US who didn’t want to recognize the fact that, by then, they were ruled by American laws.”

Regarding Zardari’s comment on the Indian chiefs, it was obvious that the Native Indians in the US, whose land was stolen, were going to fight till the end. However, some of the Taliban in Pakistan (and in Afghanistan) are foreigners like the white Europeans who “discovered” the Americas and then through genocidal wars became the masters of the land, and so the comparison does not really apply.

Lila Thadani’s letter
Date: Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 12:28 PM
Subject: Please wake up sisters, Nafisa Shah and Busha Gohar
To: Nafisa Shah , Busha Gohar

[This letter is being copied (bcc) to Women Activists and members of the press, whom we hope will continue to ask you questions. We are not certain about the correctness of the email addresses of our two parliamentarians. In case the addresses below have been superseded, please forward this letter to the current addresses or send it to them by normal post. Thanks. Lila]

Ms. Nafisa Shah (PPP), Ms. Bushra Gohar (ANP), Members of Pakistan Parliament

Re: Your approach to the Nizam e Adal debate in Parliament.

Dear Sisters,

So what did we end up seeing: [Mr.] Ayaz Amir rising to bravely oppose the Bill, a mullah making a feeble technical protest about what flavor of Sharia one is to adopt, and the MQM like both these individuals merely abstaining just abstaining, not voting against this dastardly Bill.

And then one looked at the sisters, all 60 of them, and it seemed they had wetted their panties –- excuse my French! What happened to the great campaigner for banning Karo Kari [honor killing], and the wonderfully brave Pukhtun lassie?

As a Hindu living in Sindh, and wanting to continue to do so, I am fighting against serious odd hand-in-hand with our revolutionary Muslim and Christian sisters. We know of the killing of my people in Umerkot, about which none of your parties have taken any action or expressed sympathy.

We know that Nafisa’s father is the Chief Minister of Sindh and it is his responsibility to maintain peace in the province. Or is his only task now to bow to his masters, the fascist MQM (whose recent abstaining doesn’t wash off their past sins)?

Razia Bhatti, the founder editor of Newsline (where Nafisa learnt her ropes), will be turning in her grave at how her star reporter Nafisa has become an ardent supporter of one of the most corrupt individuals to lead this country. All this for the sake of PPP loyalty, and transitory power?

Remember dear sisters, your parliamentary slots will not remain for life. You will have to climb down and be with the rest of us. How will you be able to face us and the true reality after selling your soul to power?

You of course you know the way to redeem yourself –- you have recommended it to others in the days when you had tongues. Speak up or ship out, now. You are better outside than inside that pointless white cube of a parliament on Constitution Ave.

Wishing you the strength of your old conscience,
Your sister in strength,

Lila Thadani
Sindh Adyoon Tehreek
Sukkur

Response from Busha Gohar
On Sunday, April 19, 2009 at 3:43 PM

Dear Lila Thadani:

Salaamoona and Greetings!!

many thanks for sharing your indignation and vehement reaction to the women parliamentarians alleged silence when the Nizam i Adl regulation was taken up in the National Assembly. It has indeed become a national trait to react to events and situations rather than take positions in a timely manner to build sufficient peoples pressure and build consensus on alternatives. Unfortunately we did not witness from the women rights activists a movement against the carnage in Swat, against the peace agreement with Sufi Mohammad and a strong protest outside the Parliament against the Nizam-i-Adl regulation either. Instead to soothe their conscience a few activists have registered their protest through cyberspace or the media channels from their comfort zones. None have tried to understand the complexities of the situation in Swat, its links with the mainstream terror outfits operating in the country and the conditions that led to the peace agreement in Swat. Though I feel the people of Swat are lucky that at least there is some debate in the media and among the activists but there is complete silence on the atrocities being committed in FATA since the military operations started in Waziristan in 2004. Therefore, I too have been very concerned with the eerie silence or mute response from women rights activists mainly from the mainland to the carnage in Swat that was going on for over 8 months both at the hands of the Military and the Militants. It was only after personal appeals to activists and opionion makers mainly from Pakhtunkhwa that we got a few brave ones willing to stick their necks out and speak of the atrocities being committed in the valley. Their writings in the print media drew National and International attention to what was going on in the once most beautiful and peaceful valley of the country. The Pakhtunkhwa Provincial Assembly for the first time in the history of this country openly condemned the military’s shady operation allowing the militants to gain ground and strength in Swat. They threatened to march to Swat if the attacks on the innocent people were not stopped by both sides. A direct consequence of this was one of the ANP MPAs was targeted and killed for taking a strong position. More than 136 ANP elected representatives families, office bearers and workers have been targeted and killed in Swat alone. Several had their homes destroyed and were forced to leave the area to live in camps or with families settled outside. Elected representatives were threatened that their families and voters would be targeted if they said anything against the militants. Yet we heard Swat PPP MNA and a few ANP Swat MPAs openly speak out against what was going on in their areas. The women representatives of all political parties and civil society held a massive jirga in Peshawar in March in the wake of life threats to present their perspective on the situation in Swat and the rest of the country and outlined conditions for a peace agreement with the militants.

South Asia Citizens Wire for more

Singer, Noor Jahan; lyricist, Tanveer Naqwi; music, Nisar Bazmi

Pakistani Singer/songwriter Ayman Udas was recently killed by her brothers for singing and appearing on television.

By Mahfuzur Rahman

IN recent months, there has been a spate of headlines about activities of Islamist militants all over the country. A veritable redoubt has been discovered in the south of the country, complete with training facilities, explosives, arms and ammunition, and even a moat to make it impregnable. Militant women have been found with jihadi literature in their possession. There have been reports of renewed activities by militant groups that had been driven underground by police action.

As usual, these have raised an alarm. There has been talk of reforming madrasa education. One important minister has talked about bringing the traditional madrasas within the ambit of general education under government supervision. Alarmed at the prospect, madrasa leaders rushed to meet the prime minister to seek her assurance of their continued academic autonomy and, perhaps more significantly, to assure her that they would themselves fight militancy.

And then there has been silence. This is reminiscent of the many earlier episodes of militant activity, its quick condemnation, warnings from the government that such activities would not be tolerated, and finally, a declaration that Islam was a religion of peace and therefore did not sanction violence. In retrospect, the latest noises are as meaningless as the ensuing silence is dangerous.

Look closely at two features of the latest reaction to militancy; the government’s wish (as far as it can be guessed from ministerial pronouncements) to bring madrasa education in line with general education, and the pledge of the leaders of madrasa education to fight militancy. Both are seriously short on details; both obscure great obstacles.

First, there has been talk of introducing “secular” subjects of general education, such as science and mathematics, into the curriculum of madrasa education. But, to start with, the indications are that madrasa leaders will jealously guard against any such move, except perhaps insofar as the change is only peripheral. If the proposed changes were radical, madrasas would not be madrasas. Would they? That has, in fact, been the assertion of these leaders. And they have a point.

But suppose courses in science and mathematics are introduced, will that make a difference? It is highly unlikely that it will. Teaching of elementary science at school level will do nothing to change attitudes among young minds. The only exceptions are the science of evolution, and an area of astrophysics that places man in relation to the unimaginable vastness of the universe. It is hard to imagine that these areas of science will be favourites in a madrasa curriculum.

The crux of the problem of militancy is the closing of the mind that much of madrasa education accomplishes. That brings us to the second reaction to the recent talks about reform; that leaders of madrasas will themselves fight militancy. It is not at all clear how they propose to that.

The only effective way to entice young minds away from militancy is to encourage them to interpret injunctions in the Quran and hadith in the light of circumstances and the state of human knowledge that are vastly different from those a millennium and a half ago. Madrasa leaders must take a lead here. It is highly unlikely that they will.

The more likely scenario is that literalist Islam will dominate the curriculum. The pledge to fight militancy in that case will surely be an empty one. It will simply not be enough to tell the students that Islam is a religion of peace.

Makers of education policy must go far beyond just talking about reform. Mere tinkering will not do. To begin with, they have to enter into a serious dialogue with the leaders of madrasa education, asking them how precisely they wish to fight militancy, given the considerations briefly mentioned here.

It is also essential to see the entire question of reform of madrasa education in the context of the constitutional commitment of the country to establish a truly pluralist society, where all shades of individual preferences are free to thrive. Leaders of madrsas must explain how their thinking fits in that context.

If this looks like something that goes way beyond just education policy, it is because it does. The questions raised by talks of education reform involve far more than that. The sooner this is realised the better. The silence that has fallen after the recent noise about reform portends the danger of the real issues being shoved under the carpet — again.

Mahfuzur Rahman is a former United Nations economist and an occasional contributor to The Daily Star.

Daily Star

When Pakisan’s president visits the White House next week, he’s sure to ask for another handout. But Fatima Bhutto, niece of the late Benazir Bhutto, says the billions of dollars the U.S. gives are merely propping up a government that’s capitulating to terror.

Fatima Bhutto is a graduate of Columbia University and the School of Oriental and African Studies. She is working on a book to be published by Jonathan Cape in 2010. Fatima lives and works in Karachi, Pakistan.

By Fatima Bhutto

In Pakistan things move at a leisurely South Asian pace. We missed our goals to eradicate polio recently because we, a nuclear nation, could not sustain electricity across the country long enough to refrigerate the vaccines. Garbage disposal is a nonexistent concept, and plush neighborhoods in Karachi boast towers of rubbish piled on street corners and alleyways. Prisons and police cells are full of prisoners awaiting trials, and our justice system, despite the reinstatement of the Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudry, leaves a lot to be desired in terms of meting out free and fair access to justice.
One thing moving ridiculously fast, however, is the Taliban’s stranglehold on the country. After two years of fighting off Taliban insurgents camped out in the lush Swat Valley, Pakistan’s president, Asif Zardari, threw in the towel last week and gave the militants what they wanted—Shariah law.

Never mind that Pakistan’s constitution stipulates that no law contrary to Islam can be passed in the land. The no-goodnik president, who The Wall Street Journal called a “Category 5 disaster,” went ahead and unilaterally—without a vote granted to the citizens of Swat—imposed Shariah. So perhaps it shouldn’t be considered a great surprise that a week after the law was passed, the Taliban, in typical breakneck speed, have now advanced into the Buner district, a mere 70 miles from the capital.

Meanwhile, President Obama is set to meet with President Zardari (who locals have now taken to calling President Ghadari, or “traitor” in Urdu) in 10 days’ time. There is, I’d imagine, much to discuss.
The most important question that will come from Pakistan, however, is a familiar one: Can we have some more please? Money, that is, not Taliban. It may surprise some Americans that even in the midst of this recession, billions of their tax dollars are given directly to the thievery corporation that is Pakistan’s government, never to be seen again. George W. Bush gave Pakistan a whopping $10 billion to fight terror, money that seems to have gone down the drain—or rather, into some pretty deep pockets. And it’s not just the U.S.—last week, international donors from 30 countries met in Tokyo and pledged $5 billion to Pakistan to “fight terror.” The IMF has given the country $7.6 billion in a bailout deal that boggles the mind. Saudi Arabia has generously pledged $700 million over the next four years, and the less-generous European Union an additional $640 million over the same period. And then there’s Obama’s promise of $1.5 billion a year, dependent, the White House says, on results.

It’s phenomenally silly to give that kind of money to a president who, before becoming president, was facing corruption cases in Switzerland, Spain, and England. Zardari and his wife, the late Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, are estimated to have stolen upwards of $3 billion from the Pakistani Treasury—a figure Zardari doesn’t seem desperate to disprove, he placed his personal assets before becoming president at over $1 billion.

Daily Beast for more
(Submitted by Abdul Hamid Bashani Khan)

As Tamil Nadu goes to the polls, there are fears that the Tamil Tigers will regroup in the Indian state and add to insecurity in the subcontinent

By Padraig Colman

India and Sri Lanka have both been holding elections. Although India is touted as the world’s largest democracy and Sri Lanka praised for peaceful handovers of power since independence in 1948, elections in both countries have potential for violence, and their politics are intertwined. The Sri Lanka government believes it is close to securing a military victory over the LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) who have been engaged in a bloody struggle since 1983 to achieve a separate Tamil state in the north and east of Sri Lanka.

As the Indian state of Tamil Nadu goes to the polls on 13 May, its chief minister M Karunanidhi and opposition leader Jeyaram Jayalalitha are trying to outdo each other in support for Sri Lanka’s Tamils. Jayalalitha has vowed that if she becomes Tamil Nadu’s chief minister again she will use her influence to send Indian troops into Sri Lanka to create a separate state of Tamil Eelam.

Although the Sinhalese are the majority in Sri Lanka, they have a minority complex: Tamil may be the language of just 11% of the population (of 20 million), but there are more than 62 million Tamil speakers just across the Palk Straits in India.

Meanwhile Tamil Nadu itself has long been fractious, and the Sri Lankan situation has a destabilising effect on its polity: many Indians in Tamil Nadu support the Sri Lankan separatist militants. Continuing civilian casualties in northern Sri Lanka have led to violent protests in Tamil Nadu, and immolations and hunger strikes. Chief Minister Karunanidhi himself went on a brief hunger strike (described as a fast from breakfast to lunch rather than a fast unto death).

Over the years, India has not just played a passive role in Sri Lankan affairs. Its intelligence service, the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), trained Sri Lankan Tamil militants at a RAW base in Uttar Pradesh in 1983. Arms deliveries to various Sri Lankan Tamil separatist groups began in 1984.

In 1982, exiled LTTE leader V Prabakharan had been arrested in Madras, when he was captured by a mob after a shootout with a rival militant. The Sri Lankan authorities were overjoyed that the man they had hunted for seven years for the murder of the mayor of Jaffna was now in custody.

Tamil Nadu’s chief minister was then the former film star MG Ramachandran. He and (current chief minister) Karunanidhi, another graduate of the film industry, were old rivals who saw the Eelam campaign in terms of their own electoral advantage. They used their influence to ensure that Prabakharan was not extradited to Sri Lanka and that the Indian government continued to support the separatist militants.

However, the Indian government discovered that the Sri Lankan militants it harboured were not easy to control. After Indira Gandhi was assassinated, her son Rajiv followed different advice and tried to mediate. Initially the atmosphere between the two nations improved and the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord was signed on 29 July 1987, which led to the Indian army operating in northern Sri Lanka. India then expected the LTTE to hand over its arms, but the LTTE resisted efforts by the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) to disarm them: the LTTE was as ready to fight the Indians as it was to fight the Sinhalese. The Indians at first sent 10,000 troops but, with unexpected resistance from the LTTE, the number increased to 100,000. The LTTE took control of Jaffna and set about eliminating their Tamil rivals.

Le Monde Diplomatique for more

‘Nuclear Weapons Are Not Kalashnikovs’

The West is concerned about the stability of Pakistan. SPIEGEL spoke with President Asif Ali Zardari, 53, about failed peace talks with the Taliban, the possible whereabouts of Osama bin Laden and the safety of his country’s nuclear arsenal.

SPIEGEL: Mr. President, the Taliban is advancing deeper and deeper into the heart of Pakistan. Does your army lack the will or the capability to effectively combat the extremists?

Zardari: Neither the one nor the other. Swat itself has a particular nature — its physical boundaries limit our action and capabilities. We had a similar situation in Bajaur along the border to Afghanistan. There, too, we went in with F-16s, tanks, heavy artillery and our forces. At the time, 800,000 people lived in the region, and 500,000 were displaced by the fighting. What we really wanted, though, was for the local population to stay and help resist the Taliban on their land. In the case of Swat, the Taliban used the population as human shields. A more aggressive offensive would have caused greater civilian casualties. For us, the concept of a policy of dialogue has always applied. War is not the solution to every kind of problem.
SPIEGEL: The peace agreement you supported with militant Islamists in Swat Valley just failed like others before it. The Taliban didn’t give up their arms as agreed to in the deal. Are deals with extremists a realistic strategy for peace?

Zardari: During negotiations, we try to differentiate between copycats or criminals and the hardcore. It is an ongoing insurgency which takes time to finish. We go in with our troops, we talk, we retreat, we pull back, and then the Taliban goes on a new offensive. It is a drawn-out issue and there is no encyclopaedia one can turn to for answers. I would advise you to read about the Afghan wars. It’s the way the Taliban, who are Pashtuns, fight: They take you on and then they melt into the mountains. And you often can’t tell who is who or what they are up to. These men are like old Indian chiefs in the US who didn’t want to recognize the fact that, by then, they were ruled by American laws.

SPIEGEL: The chief Taliban negotiator in Swat, Sufi Mohammed, claims that democracy is opposed to Islam. So what are the foundations for a treaty?

Zardari: When he refuses to recognize Pakistan’s constitution, he is breaking the terms of the peace deal. That gives our negotiators and the populace the support they need to take him on. If the deal doesn’t work, then parliament will have to decide on it again. That’s democracy and, as you can see, it works.

Spiegel Online for more