At the recent General Assembly session, Israel made it clear that nothing is more important to Israelis than Iran’s nuclear program. Jerusalem is irrelevant. Hamas is secondary. The world economy is not important. Iran’s nuclear program must be stopped, and anything and everything is justified to achieve this goal.
Benjamin Netanyahu called for a ‘red line’ to be set – a certain point in Iran’s enrichment endeavors when military assaults would be justified. He also sweepingly claimed that Iran was weeks away from developing a nuclear bomb and used a crude picture of a bomb on a piece of paper to illustrate his point to an audience of (presumably ignorant and dumb) diplomats. But dogmatic, sweeping statements can only go that far.
One fundamental loophole in the ‘red line’ argument is that Netanyahu purposely ignores the wider implications of such a military action in a highly volatile Middle Eastern region. Such aggression will not only lead to an elongated battle between the two vicious arch-rivals, Israel and Iran but also jeopardize the integrity of the entire region. Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Middle East will not approve of Israeli action, and might as well join the assault against Iran, but also against Israel, causing a three-pronged war. The US has also not declared absolute support for the ‘red line’ plan, so the action will be entirely unilateral, at least initially. Clearly, Israel’s own impulses have clouded its objective assessment of a military action.
Another fatal flaw in this plan is the impracticality of such an action. According to BBC, Israel only partially possesses the capability to war with Iran continuously. Israeli jets will require constant refueling as they fight, and perhaps along the way, which is implausible. In order to reach Iran, Israeli troops will have to cross a huge stretch of territory mostly covered by nations who hate Israel to the core. In addition, Iran is likely to receive support from Pakistan, officially or unofficially in any war against Israel. Israel’s war will be a humongous drain on its resources, unless it is supported unconditionally by the USA, which is not guaranteed at this point in time. And US support is shaky with the upcoming US elections and the global economic crisis in general.
Israel’s statement is also the pinnacle of hypocrisy. A nation engulfed in the ludicrous ideology of nuclear ambiguity, Israel seeks transparency and nuclear program suspension in Iran even though Israel itself is widely believed to possess nuclear weapons and has not even joined the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Israel’s Dimona plant is one of the most dubious facilities in the world.
Israel’s justification for military action is also largely based on speculation and assumption. Netanyahu mentioned in his speech that Iran was close to reaching the 90% uranium enrichment milestone, but he did not substantiate this with any valid evidence. He superficially mentions random IAEA reports, but fails to quote specific findings that should cause alarm. Most countries believe that it will take Iran a few years before its apparent pursuit of nuclear weapons reaches fruition, unlike Israel. So who do we trust: 190 other countries or Benjamin Netanyahu?
If a red line has to be set, the ultimatum should be further sanctions or restrictions or non-military measures. A hot war between the two countries could very well erupt into a global war. You may argue that Iran has few allies, and that a conflict will be very one-sided. However, one thing we know from experience is that Iran is frustratingly resilient – it will resist any challenge even if it translates into mass torture and drudgery for its own citizens. The Israel and the US will undoubtedly side together but the other Western nations are unlikely to join in actively. And if Iran does possess a nuclear weapon, it might as well bring two, and potentially three or four (if Pakistan joins in, and Israel possesses nuclear arms) nations at the precipice of nuclear war.
It is high time that the international community focuses more on incentives and prudent compromises rather than throwing hay bales of sanctions at Iran. These measures will only frustrate Iran rather than alleviate the tension. The Iranian solution is a complex and depressingly dystopian. We don’t know what the best solution is or how many solutions are out there. But one thing is clear – red lines and bloodbaths are not part of them.
Arvin Anoop
FY - K
Friday, October 19, 2012
Thursday, October 18, 2012
The Innocence of Muslims
The (now) much famous film has caused a firestorm in the Muslim world. The film is the epitome of crassness and ignominy. But it doesn’t take a genius to pin point that out. What does seem to be a Herculean task for some is to understand the social and economic implications of such vast and violent outrage. In an attempt to tame the views of those who are still hot-blooded and wish to act irrationally on some deep-rooted hatred, this is a call, an essay with the aim to hopefully, trace the line between protest and uproar.
Salman Rushdie, a British novelist spoke in terms that encapsulate the essence of the film. When questioned about it, he said, “There are two things to talk about, the first, is the YouTube video, and the second is the response,” he said. “The video is trashy. It’s badly made, it may be the worst video on YouTube, and that’s saying something, competing with all those videos of people’s cats. “And its intent was to stir trouble,” he continued. “As I understand, the video was around for a year, before it was dubbed into Arabic and intentionally sent to several people with the goal of getting them in a bad mood. And that worked.” I couldn’t have said it better myself. What started out as a barely known, obscure film that lurked in the shadows of YouTube soon emerged and captured the attention of thousands of people all around the world. The film-maker, is now probably very wealthy, and moreover, quite certainly very happy. Is this what we wanted? We saw the video, and we stormed to the streets, with our flags and our tiny banners. Others followed with sticks, stumbling along the boundaries of the embassy, aiming to strike at it. Let me just throw in a few numbers. At least15 people were killed, more than 120 were injured, and needless to say, ramifications on business were severe. Many shot bullets into the air, mobs roamed like flocks, throwing anything tangible at the police. Colossal damage took place and what started out as a day labeled as "Love of Prophet Muhammad Day", had a rather ironic ring to it. Is this how he would have dealt with such a situation, one asks? Certainly there is not love here, there is only violence.
The United States took a diplomatic stance, they condemned the video but there was not much they could even do. Abiding by their rigid constitution, they only followed the First Amendment. So to blame them for the movie is ludicrous. There is no one to blame but the film maker, Mosab Hassan Yousef himself. Why are our emotions and actions governed by him? Have we not already given him the satisfaction of what he wanted from us? He yearned for popularity. We handed it to him in the worst way we knew how. We can probably, and might as well even, imagine him coyly sitting and smirking at his success. What a shame.
Our economy suffered, as though it’s not already facing enough setbacks. Businesses went out of order, the stagnation in the market led to no progress. There was a film made in America and we blow up our own people. Oh and the icing on the cake is this, he recently told the LA times he had already cast a "Hollywood actor" in the title role of his $30 million film, titled Muhammad. His work started out on YouTube as a free-for-all, menial ‘trailer’ and he’s just working his way up. But he now has the funds to do it, and no matter how many people we kill, or things we burn, we can’t stop him. We can however deal with it by condemning it, making sure that he suffers losses by not promoting the film in anyway.
So I conclude this rant by saying that, the internet is a pool of rubble, mixed emotions and irascible people. When people ignore it and choose to ignore it, a lot of the garbage remains unearthed. This should have been the case here. So I urge that next time something similar happens we think before we act, for we are only harming innocent people.
Shanzeh Agrawala
Salman Rushdie, a British novelist spoke in terms that encapsulate the essence of the film. When questioned about it, he said, “There are two things to talk about, the first, is the YouTube video, and the second is the response,” he said. “The video is trashy. It’s badly made, it may be the worst video on YouTube, and that’s saying something, competing with all those videos of people’s cats. “And its intent was to stir trouble,” he continued. “As I understand, the video was around for a year, before it was dubbed into Arabic and intentionally sent to several people with the goal of getting them in a bad mood. And that worked.” I couldn’t have said it better myself. What started out as a barely known, obscure film that lurked in the shadows of YouTube soon emerged and captured the attention of thousands of people all around the world. The film-maker, is now probably very wealthy, and moreover, quite certainly very happy. Is this what we wanted? We saw the video, and we stormed to the streets, with our flags and our tiny banners. Others followed with sticks, stumbling along the boundaries of the embassy, aiming to strike at it. Let me just throw in a few numbers. At least15 people were killed, more than 120 were injured, and needless to say, ramifications on business were severe. Many shot bullets into the air, mobs roamed like flocks, throwing anything tangible at the police. Colossal damage took place and what started out as a day labeled as "Love of Prophet Muhammad Day", had a rather ironic ring to it. Is this how he would have dealt with such a situation, one asks? Certainly there is not love here, there is only violence.
The United States took a diplomatic stance, they condemned the video but there was not much they could even do. Abiding by their rigid constitution, they only followed the First Amendment. So to blame them for the movie is ludicrous. There is no one to blame but the film maker, Mosab Hassan Yousef himself. Why are our emotions and actions governed by him? Have we not already given him the satisfaction of what he wanted from us? He yearned for popularity. We handed it to him in the worst way we knew how. We can probably, and might as well even, imagine him coyly sitting and smirking at his success. What a shame.
Our economy suffered, as though it’s not already facing enough setbacks. Businesses went out of order, the stagnation in the market led to no progress. There was a film made in America and we blow up our own people. Oh and the icing on the cake is this, he recently told the LA times he had already cast a "Hollywood actor" in the title role of his $30 million film, titled Muhammad. His work started out on YouTube as a free-for-all, menial ‘trailer’ and he’s just working his way up. But he now has the funds to do it, and no matter how many people we kill, or things we burn, we can’t stop him. We can however deal with it by condemning it, making sure that he suffers losses by not promoting the film in anyway.
So I conclude this rant by saying that, the internet is a pool of rubble, mixed emotions and irascible people. When people ignore it and choose to ignore it, a lot of the garbage remains unearthed. This should have been the case here. So I urge that next time something similar happens we think before we act, for we are only harming innocent people.
Shanzeh Agrawala
The New Asian Cold War – Now Inevitable
As up to 70 maritime patrol vessels and coast guard ships circle the remote set of rocks in the East China Sea, tension mounts on the other side of the globe. Fearful that an Asian cold war with two of the world’s largest economies at opposite ends might commence, Pentagon’s chief calls for calm in the China - Japan spat. Yet, anti-Japan protests continue to rock the major cities of China whilst Japanese companies including Honda, Toyota and Aeon continue to suspend operations inside the Chinese Republic.
The deep rooted hatred that has become evident through this incidental ‘flare-up’ serves is yet another reminder of just how potent territorial disputes remain in Asia. The island dispute is, therefore, not just a diplomatic scuffle but a clear sign indicating and revealing that the wounds of previous conflicts are still fresh. In view of the current situation, it may well be said that this ‘war of words’ might result in a spite filled cold war that could last for years if not decades.
Even though there has been a massive amount of economic integration between the two countries, the danger, clearly, is that politics will trump economics in the new Asian cold war. Although Japan is a big investor in China with two way trade worth $342.9billion last year, it continues to assert territorial authority by pressing on with the islands issue. Therefore, it is evident that the economic friendship will be of no use if China and Japan were to end up in actual conflict.
This fate is more worrying for the world than for the rivals themselves. If the world’s second and third largest economies were to clash, then the global markets would be completely destabilized and who knows what devastating repercussions would face the dependent nations. It is therefore imperative that the international community helps these conflicting nations in sorting out their issues.
The issues, however, are not that simple – there has been a constantly competitive rivalry between China and Japan over the previous three centuries. By the 1700’s China had become the most dominant and advanced empire in the Far East. Travelers from Japan realized how savage and backwards the Japanese were as compared to their counterparts in China. From then on the Japanese began a wave of economic and military development which inevitably led to territorial expansion. A large chunk of Northern China as well as Taiwan, Korea and the surrounding Pacific Islands came under Japanese rule by the early 1940’s. Japanese products were considered the superior products in the world market due to their high standard of quality. Hence economic rivalry had also begun.
After the Second World War, however, the Japanese were driven out of China with the assistance of the international community and the People’s Republic of China was formed under the inspiring leadership of Mao Zedong. Ideologically, socially, culturally and economically China had been reformed. And so it began its ‘great leap forward’ – the leap to overtake economic and political rival Japan.
………
Since then China has advanced so much that at present it is an economic giant and has overtaken its eastern competitor in terms of industry, trade and political power. Thus the spark of territorial dispute continues to be fuelled by the long lasting sentiments of competitiveness and hate.
Hence, it is clear that the current China-Japan row is an outcome of the thriving and growing framework of conflict that has developed over the span of centuries. The only way to stop this cataclysmic cold war from flaring up is that either of the two economic giants gives up its claim on the remote set of rocks. The side that ultimately does this, will, through that gesture, convey its message of wanting peace and stability in the Asian region. Until then the world waits……
Daniyal Motan FY-K
The deep rooted hatred that has become evident through this incidental ‘flare-up’ serves is yet another reminder of just how potent territorial disputes remain in Asia. The island dispute is, therefore, not just a diplomatic scuffle but a clear sign indicating and revealing that the wounds of previous conflicts are still fresh. In view of the current situation, it may well be said that this ‘war of words’ might result in a spite filled cold war that could last for years if not decades.
Even though there has been a massive amount of economic integration between the two countries, the danger, clearly, is that politics will trump economics in the new Asian cold war. Although Japan is a big investor in China with two way trade worth $342.9billion last year, it continues to assert territorial authority by pressing on with the islands issue. Therefore, it is evident that the economic friendship will be of no use if China and Japan were to end up in actual conflict.
This fate is more worrying for the world than for the rivals themselves. If the world’s second and third largest economies were to clash, then the global markets would be completely destabilized and who knows what devastating repercussions would face the dependent nations. It is therefore imperative that the international community helps these conflicting nations in sorting out their issues.
The issues, however, are not that simple – there has been a constantly competitive rivalry between China and Japan over the previous three centuries. By the 1700’s China had become the most dominant and advanced empire in the Far East. Travelers from Japan realized how savage and backwards the Japanese were as compared to their counterparts in China. From then on the Japanese began a wave of economic and military development which inevitably led to territorial expansion. A large chunk of Northern China as well as Taiwan, Korea and the surrounding Pacific Islands came under Japanese rule by the early 1940’s. Japanese products were considered the superior products in the world market due to their high standard of quality. Hence economic rivalry had also begun.
After the Second World War, however, the Japanese were driven out of China with the assistance of the international community and the People’s Republic of China was formed under the inspiring leadership of Mao Zedong. Ideologically, socially, culturally and economically China had been reformed. And so it began its ‘great leap forward’ – the leap to overtake economic and political rival Japan.
………
Since then China has advanced so much that at present it is an economic giant and has overtaken its eastern competitor in terms of industry, trade and political power. Thus the spark of territorial dispute continues to be fuelled by the long lasting sentiments of competitiveness and hate.
Hence, it is clear that the current China-Japan row is an outcome of the thriving and growing framework of conflict that has developed over the span of centuries. The only way to stop this cataclysmic cold war from flaring up is that either of the two economic giants gives up its claim on the remote set of rocks. The side that ultimately does this, will, through that gesture, convey its message of wanting peace and stability in the Asian region. Until then the world waits……
Daniyal Motan FY-K
Case Against Intervention in Syria
When the protests started on the 15 of March, 2011, during the Arab Spring, the world had started to look at another Arab country with a dictator whose time was up. It had three major similarities to the other protests which made the world reason that President Bashar al-Assad time was up. He like Ben Ali, Qaddafi, Mubarak and Saleh had:
• Ruled his country for a considerable amount of time, 12 years to be exact.
• His government had a terrible human rights record, among the worst in the world.
• High youth unemployment rates and deterioration of standard of living.
• Western countries supporting the opposition.
However this is where the similarities stop and a new scenario is presented in an entirely new country. Syria is not the same as the countries mentioned above. Unlike Mubarak and Ben Ali, the military still supports Al-Assad. Unlike Qaddafi, he still has 3 major allies, 2 with veto power in the United Nation Security Council. If there is a major military intervention by the west it will no longer be considered a civil war, it will become a proxy war, because it is not simply the matter of a dictator who is a bad and everyone who is against him is automatically good. What started out as a protest by the people has become a very complicated scenario where one cannot be sure of who to support.
First we need to understand why foreign intervention is wrong and what foreign intervention would mean. Firstly the problem with foreign intervention is that people will not be voting on who the military aid should go to. It will not be a democracy; in fact the countries giving the aid will decide. So in effect out of the several rebel groups that have sprung about, the ones supported by the west will actually win this civil war not those supported by the people. The rebel groups which the Saudi Arabia, Qatar or Turkey supports will be likely to win by an intervention these groups would not necessarily be true representation of the people. This distinction is important to make as it makes us realize that by intervention we will not be supporting the right of the people to rule, instead will be appointing a puppet ruler much like the case in Afghanistan. If we do look at the situation of Afghanistan, the western intervention did topple a totalitarian regime there and put there a western backed government as has been proposed for Syria. Yet Afghanistan is in a state of utter chaos with the government accused of massive corruption and human rights problem still exists.
The question remains is Syria any different? With an unorganized rebel group, who is to lead the country after the civil war if the rebels win? A war within the civil war is brewing in Syria. It is a battle of ideas, a struggle for the overall direction of the insurgency that is pitting moderate-Muslims against Salafists, jihadists and other Islamist groups. With the West backing the moderates and Saudi Arabia backing the Islamist, the Syrian civil war may lose its identity and become a proxy war where the victor would be decided on the basis of foreign support not domestic support which really matters when we look at what everyone in the world is presumably supporting, true democracy.
Muneeb Hussain
• Ruled his country for a considerable amount of time, 12 years to be exact.
• His government had a terrible human rights record, among the worst in the world.
• High youth unemployment rates and deterioration of standard of living.
• Western countries supporting the opposition.
However this is where the similarities stop and a new scenario is presented in an entirely new country. Syria is not the same as the countries mentioned above. Unlike Mubarak and Ben Ali, the military still supports Al-Assad. Unlike Qaddafi, he still has 3 major allies, 2 with veto power in the United Nation Security Council. If there is a major military intervention by the west it will no longer be considered a civil war, it will become a proxy war, because it is not simply the matter of a dictator who is a bad and everyone who is against him is automatically good. What started out as a protest by the people has become a very complicated scenario where one cannot be sure of who to support.
First we need to understand why foreign intervention is wrong and what foreign intervention would mean. Firstly the problem with foreign intervention is that people will not be voting on who the military aid should go to. It will not be a democracy; in fact the countries giving the aid will decide. So in effect out of the several rebel groups that have sprung about, the ones supported by the west will actually win this civil war not those supported by the people. The rebel groups which the Saudi Arabia, Qatar or Turkey supports will be likely to win by an intervention these groups would not necessarily be true representation of the people. This distinction is important to make as it makes us realize that by intervention we will not be supporting the right of the people to rule, instead will be appointing a puppet ruler much like the case in Afghanistan. If we do look at the situation of Afghanistan, the western intervention did topple a totalitarian regime there and put there a western backed government as has been proposed for Syria. Yet Afghanistan is in a state of utter chaos with the government accused of massive corruption and human rights problem still exists.
The question remains is Syria any different? With an unorganized rebel group, who is to lead the country after the civil war if the rebels win? A war within the civil war is brewing in Syria. It is a battle of ideas, a struggle for the overall direction of the insurgency that is pitting moderate-Muslims against Salafists, jihadists and other Islamist groups. With the West backing the moderates and Saudi Arabia backing the Islamist, the Syrian civil war may lose its identity and become a proxy war where the victor would be decided on the basis of foreign support not domestic support which really matters when we look at what everyone in the world is presumably supporting, true democracy.
Muneeb Hussain
Sunday, April 1, 2012
Times Are Changing
Billions of years ago, when the earth was born, when the first golden rays of sunshine shone upon its lush plains, when nature thrived in undisputable harmony, when mere existence was drenched in purity, Gaia – Mother Earth – couldn’t have possibly foreseen the disastrous course of events that were to wear her down, tear her apart, shatter her completely.
We talk about milestones and progress and covering leaps and bounds. We talk about sustainability and diversity and interdependence. Each day, we take new steps; uncover the secrets of life that have been mystifying the inhabitants of earth since the beginning of time. We are living in an age where we have proven that nothing is impossible for the human race.
Speaking of discoveries, let us step back into the weathered and worn pages of history, into the life of a little boy thrown out of school at the tender age of nine for being ‘retarded’. We’re talking about Einstein here, incase you’re feeling lost.
Einstein, with his theory of relativity, Swedish braniacs Marie and Pierre Curie and her discovery of radium and polonium and further developments carried out by Lise Meitner and Neils Bohr, took the world by storm; gave birth to an idea that was to change the face of the earth as we see it today – harnessing nuclear energy – and, in turn, paved away for the deadly nuclear bomb.
We have delved into discoveries, making our lives simpler, easier and more manageable. Progression has caused the human race to accomplish feats that seemed impossible just a few generations ago. Coal, oil and today, nuclear energy poses to take the position of the fuel of the future. Less than five kilograms of Uranium possess the ability to produce energy equivalent to several thousand tones of coal. As we sit in our bedrooms, rattling off facts and figures at the tips of our fingers, we ignore a possibility that may, very soon, turn into reality.
Nuclear destruction. 1945. World War Two. Total loss of lives: 50 to 70 million
6th and 9th of August of 1945; two atomic bombs dropped on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Within these few minutes, the lives of hundreds of people plunged into chaos. Utter misery.
The severe effects killed 90,000–166,000 people in Hiroshima and 60,000–80,000 in Nagasaki.
200,000 had died by 1950, due to cancer and other long-term effects.
Indeed, life has become a lot simpler.
On April 26th, 1986 the fourth reactor of a nuclear power plant in Chernobyl, Ukraine, exploded at 1:23 AM local time, resulting in the expulsion of radioactive material and consequently, the evacuation of about 135,000 people. Radioactive particles settled on trees, killing approximately 400 hectares of pine forest.
On the 28th of Match 1979, the US of A experienced its worst nuclear accident – a partial meltdown of the reactor core at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant near Middletown, Pennsylvania. A recent study concluded that the death rates for infants, children and the elderly soared in the two years that followed after this incident, in Dauphin and surrounding regions.
Turning back to Mother Earth here, as she withers with pain, threatens to crack under the pressure and strain inflicted upon her – do we stop to think? Do we bother disengaging ourselves from our entirely self-absorbed, self-centered lifestyles to pause, stop and think? Think about the colossal consequences of our seemingly harmless actions. And most importantly, do we realize where we’re headed?
Zuha Siddiqui
FY L
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
What Will Happen to Libya?
It has been 8 arduous months since the revolutionary uprising by the anti –government rebels against Col. Muammar -el Qaddafi and while he has been deposed two months ago, Libya is still walking a tight rope as support for the ousted dictator still exists and poses a threat to the Transitional National Council which has taken temporary control of the Libyan government. After a month of much needed peace in the volatile country, fighting broke out on Friday between the rebel fighters and armed men which raised cries of support for Col. Muammar –el Qaddafi. Though there were no reports of casualties, this incident will no doubt be a worrying sign for the provisional government and draw more focus to the last of Qaddafi’s strongholds in Libya – The coastal city of Surt and the desert enclave of Bani Walid. The hundred’s of fighters that occupy this area are a “resilient and fierce” threat as said by The commander of NATO’s air campaign, Lt. Gen. Ralph J. Jodice II.
Though it is difficult to predict how well the eventual interim government of Libya will handle the running of the country, a lot of concerns are being voiced about the Islamist nature of the current leadership and how it will play out in the eventual handling of the country. The most influential politician in the country is arguably Ali Sallabi and though he has no official title he is revered by the masses as an Islamic scholar and populist orator.
The most powerful military leader is Abdel Hakim Belhaj, an ex-leader of a group believed to have close ties with Al Qaeda.
However the people of Libya are not worried and have reinforced their support for a democratic system which they believe the interim government will adapt to the best of its abilities. Therefore, it is not surprising that an anti-Islamist, anti-Sallabi rally in Martyrs’ Square on drew only a few dozen demonstrators. Jeffrey D. Feltman, assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs also believes that the government will adopt a moderate path in the future. “Based on our discussions with Libyans so far,” he said, “we aren’t concerned that one group is going to be able to dominate the aftermath of what has been a shared struggle by the Libyan people.”
Presently though, Libya is still covered by a shroud of uncertainty but the future does seem bright politically for the country that’s been marred by killings and bloodshed since the turn of the year.
The most powerful military leader is Abdel Hakim Belhaj, an ex-leader of a group believed to have close ties with Al Qaeda.
However the people of Libya are not worried and have reinforced their support for a democratic system which they believe the interim government will adapt to the best of its abilities. Therefore, it is not surprising that an anti-Islamist, anti-Sallabi rally in Martyrs’ Square on drew only a few dozen demonstrators. Jeffrey D. Feltman, assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs also believes that the government will adopt a moderate path in the future. “Based on our discussions with Libyans so far,” he said, “we aren’t concerned that one group is going to be able to dominate the aftermath of what has been a shared struggle by the Libyan people.”
Presently though, Libya is still covered by a shroud of uncertainty but the future does seem bright politically for the country that’s been marred by killings and bloodshed since the turn of the year.
Muhammad Ahmad Altaf
FY K
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
World Affairs Society Art Competition 2011
Winner : Mazia Syed FY - W
Runner Up : Shanze Farooq SY - M
Saturday, October 30, 2010
World's Longest Train Tunnel
After being under the process of drilling for fifteen years the World’s longest tunnel has been completed in Switzerland, making way for a high-speed railway connection between northern and south-eastern Europe in the heart of Swiss Alps. The tunnel is 57 km in length (35.7 miles) and the distance between the two ends of the tunnel is 30 km (20 miles) and 9.5 m in diameter.
Around 200 dignitaries were present at the inauguration which was broadcast live on Swiss televisions. 9.8 Billion Swiss Franc have been spent on the construction of this tunnel which once completed will allow 300 trains to travel everyday at a speed of 250km/h.
It was a strenuous task for the laborers who had to bore and cut thorough 13 million cubic meters. Eight lives were lost in the process and the 2000 workers were in the limelight especially after Chilean miners were rescued.
The truck traffic through Gotthard base was causing great environmental damage and concerns were raised by the local people who demanded this traffic to be banned. They also persuaded the government to take action and find an alternate transport system in the region. Hence in response to this the idea of constructing a tunnel was taken into consideration.Thus, this tunnel once running will not only prove to be economically beneficial but will also save the beauty of the Swiss Alps which are of great significance to the country’s tourism sector.
The rail line is expected to be complete and operational in 2017 as it will then connect Italy’s Milan to Zurich in less than three hours and to Germany in the north in less than an hour. Much work remains to be done on the link, but the Tunnel has secured the title of the World’s longest railroad tunnel from Japan’s 53.8 km Seikan Tunnel, constructed in 1988.
The truck traffic through Gotthard base was causing great environmental damage and concerns were raised by the local people who demanded this traffic to be banned. They also persuaded the government to take action and find an alternate transport system in the region. Hence in response to this the idea of constructing a tunnel was taken into consideration.Thus, this tunnel once running will not only prove to be economically beneficial but will also save the beauty of the Swiss Alps which are of great significance to the country’s tourism sector.
The rail line is expected to be complete and operational in 2017 as it will then connect Italy’s Milan to Zurich in less than three hours and to Germany in the north in less than an hour. Much work remains to be done on the link, but the Tunnel has secured the title of the World’s longest railroad tunnel from Japan’s 53.8 km Seikan Tunnel, constructed in 1988.
By Midhat Meraj
Friday, October 29, 2010
Labour Party Election
On the 25th of September Ed Miliband very narrowly beat his brother, David, for the leadership of the Labor party. David had been the favorite to win and last second backing from trade unions enabled him to get the top spot. Ed has been portrayed to be more left leaning than David, who is more central and has been branded “Red Ed”. After Ed’s nervy acceptance speech and David’s brilliant valedictorian one two days later, the people present at the party conference in Manchester, even the ones who had backed Ed, were probably wondering if they had made the right choice.
David was seen as the heir to the Labor party throne, and now the MPs and activists are probably cursing the trade unions for the results. David certainly was the one who most deserved to win, having the experience as foreign secretary and being Tony Blair’s protégé. He had also been waiting for this moment for a long time, and it was his dream to become Prime Minister.
Sadly, that dream has been snatched away from him by his brother, and some see this as unfaithfulness. Now that David Miliband has announced that he is leaving frontline politics, Britain will lose an experienced and extremely able politician. It is understandable that he would not want to work under his younger brother, who has followed him everywhere, from school to the same Oxford college, into the Labor party, into Parliament and finally into the race for party leadership and there ended up being one Miliband too many.
The Tories of course, will be delighted that they get to face the younger Miliband as opposition leader, because David would have made life quite difficult for them. They will aim to exploit the Red Ed tag to the fullest, but they cannot get too complacent. In the elections, they were denied a majority because of Labor, and had to form a coalition with the Liberal Democrats.
Labor are also currently neck and neck with the conservatives in the opinion polls, and that is with Red Ed and before the budget cuts have been unveiled.
Ed’s policies will be shaped by the decisions he takes during the first few weeks of his leadership. I think that he will be more towards the left, even though this is something Labor must avoid, because when the time for general elections comes, it will make people think about whether Labor are electable or not. He will also be supporting what the trade unions say and do. He will also recommend an increase on income tax and other taxes on the upper class and make benefits easier to get. The economy will be expanded to create more jobs. He will also be advocating the plan his brother came up with, to cut the deficit by half in four years.
Let’s hope that Ed’s “new generation” actually learns from New Labor’s mistakes. If he manages to shake the Red Ed tag and centralize the party a bit, Mr. Head of Labor may just turn into Mr. Prime Minister.
Ayesha Nishtar
David was seen as the heir to the Labor party throne, and now the MPs and activists are probably cursing the trade unions for the results. David certainly was the one who most deserved to win, having the experience as foreign secretary and being Tony Blair’s protégé. He had also been waiting for this moment for a long time, and it was his dream to become Prime Minister.
Sadly, that dream has been snatched away from him by his brother, and some see this as unfaithfulness. Now that David Miliband has announced that he is leaving frontline politics, Britain will lose an experienced and extremely able politician. It is understandable that he would not want to work under his younger brother, who has followed him everywhere, from school to the same Oxford college, into the Labor party, into Parliament and finally into the race for party leadership and there ended up being one Miliband too many.
The Tories of course, will be delighted that they get to face the younger Miliband as opposition leader, because David would have made life quite difficult for them. They will aim to exploit the Red Ed tag to the fullest, but they cannot get too complacent. In the elections, they were denied a majority because of Labor, and had to form a coalition with the Liberal Democrats.
Labor are also currently neck and neck with the conservatives in the opinion polls, and that is with Red Ed and before the budget cuts have been unveiled.
Ed’s policies will be shaped by the decisions he takes during the first few weeks of his leadership. I think that he will be more towards the left, even though this is something Labor must avoid, because when the time for general elections comes, it will make people think about whether Labor are electable or not. He will also be supporting what the trade unions say and do. He will also recommend an increase on income tax and other taxes on the upper class and make benefits easier to get. The economy will be expanded to create more jobs. He will also be advocating the plan his brother came up with, to cut the deficit by half in four years.
Let’s hope that Ed’s “new generation” actually learns from New Labor’s mistakes. If he manages to shake the Red Ed tag and centralize the party a bit, Mr. Head of Labor may just turn into Mr. Prime Minister.
Ayesha Nishtar
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Is Pakistan on the verge of collapsing?
I recently heard that a country could be said to be on the brink of collapse when three scenarios are taking place simultaneously. 1) there is a financial crisis 2) the social welfare of the people is declining and 3) when there is a law and order situation. When one reads this state of affairs he is immediately reminded of Pakistan’s political and economic condition. Many are of the opinion that what this country needs yet again is another dictator and through this article I would like to address the present situation.
When a democratic government fails to establish good governance in the country, this gives rise to public unrest. Bad governance can be seen in many aspects of pakistans socio economic condition. There is hyper inflation in the market due to the devaluation of the rupee, scarcity of food which has resulted in most of the general public having to forgo several basic necessities and above all there is a lack of security in virtually all areas. So dire is the state of affairs that the government may not have money to pay salaries in a few months. The alarm about the economy was first sounded when Mr. Shaikh, a former World Bank officer informed a meeting of political and military leaders that the government had enough money to pay only two months’ salaries. Mr Shaikh was quoted as saying that the economy was “teetering on the brink” before the floods but was now heading for the “abyss.” These present conditions meet the requirements of the military to initiate a coup which at this point, seems inevitable. However, the military, preoccupied by a war against militants and reluctant to assume direct responsibility for the economic crisis, has made clear it is not eager to take over the government.
Another important factor to keep in mind are the corruption charges being faced by the present government which are being constantly delayed on the slightest of excuses. The Supreme Court is also pushing the government on the issue of corruption by threatening to remove the president’s immunity from prosecution, a move that would expose him to charges of corruption in an old money-laundering case in Switzerland.The president has been subject to such charges even before his term began. However, corruption in Pakistan can not only be seen in financial matters but in violation of merit, as well as biased and unjust decisions in favour of self or ruling party.
Zadari’s indifferent behaviour towards his nation could be seen when he decided tovisit his familys Normandy chateau while the 2010’s flood victims were being rehabilitated. Hence the government’s performance since the floods which have left about 20 million homeless and the nation dependent on handouts from foreign donors, has lead to a rising disdain for the government due to the perception among the media and the public of the callous and inept handling of the floods by the nation’s wealthy ruling class. Consequently, this has left the Pakistani nation disillusioned with its leaders resulting in an increased demand for change.
When a democratic government fails to establish good governance in the country, this gives rise to public unrest. Bad governance can be seen in many aspects of pakistans socio economic condition. There is hyper inflation in the market due to the devaluation of the rupee, scarcity of food which has resulted in most of the general public having to forgo several basic necessities and above all there is a lack of security in virtually all areas. So dire is the state of affairs that the government may not have money to pay salaries in a few months. The alarm about the economy was first sounded when Mr. Shaikh, a former World Bank officer informed a meeting of political and military leaders that the government had enough money to pay only two months’ salaries. Mr Shaikh was quoted as saying that the economy was “teetering on the brink” before the floods but was now heading for the “abyss.” These present conditions meet the requirements of the military to initiate a coup which at this point, seems inevitable. However, the military, preoccupied by a war against militants and reluctant to assume direct responsibility for the economic crisis, has made clear it is not eager to take over the government.
Another important factor to keep in mind are the corruption charges being faced by the present government which are being constantly delayed on the slightest of excuses. The Supreme Court is also pushing the government on the issue of corruption by threatening to remove the president’s immunity from prosecution, a move that would expose him to charges of corruption in an old money-laundering case in Switzerland.The president has been subject to such charges even before his term began. However, corruption in Pakistan can not only be seen in financial matters but in violation of merit, as well as biased and unjust decisions in favour of self or ruling party.
Zadari’s indifferent behaviour towards his nation could be seen when he decided tovisit his familys Normandy chateau while the 2010’s flood victims were being rehabilitated. Hence the government’s performance since the floods which have left about 20 million homeless and the nation dependent on handouts from foreign donors, has lead to a rising disdain for the government due to the perception among the media and the public of the callous and inept handling of the floods by the nation’s wealthy ruling class. Consequently, this has left the Pakistani nation disillusioned with its leaders resulting in an increased demand for change.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
A Failed State?
A semi-arid country with hardly any arable land faces the challenge of feeding its population of 9.1 million, a third of which depends on food aid. With a birth rate of 43.7 births/1000 population and a death rate of a staggering 15.5 deaths/1000, famine and diseases are the least of the problems of Somalia.
The country has lacked an effective central government since President Siad Barre was overthrown in 1991. After the failure of the fourteenth transitional government, the state’s situation has deteriorated into the world’s worst humanitarian and security crisis. Insecurity, violence and desperate poverty have been the norm. Within the complex web of problems in Somalia is that of Piracy. Various international organizations such as the World Food Programme and International Maritime Organisation have shown concern over this issue. In 2009 US President Barack Obama said that Somali piracy has to be brought under control and has prompted Nato to take the lead in anti-piracy operations.
However, what is new is that this issue has once again gotten the world concerned over the goings on of this collapsed state. The Somalis have learnt to live under the circumstances where risk of death and bloodshed are unexceptional hazards. Losing faith in the government, the Somali diaspora have helped create informal sector businesses and a fairly well maintained private sector leading to a growing economy. The brave country has a GDP per capita of $333 which is greater than that of Ethopia and Tanzania. However, about 40% of the population thrives on less than US $1 a day.
Piracy, however is a symptom of a much bigger problem. The core of the crisis is the dire need of a political settlement. Somalia, is a clan based society. The warring clans fiefdoms have greatly divided the country. A strong administrative system is required for the reconciliation of these warring militias. The rising Islamists stood in the way of the establishment of a central government since 2006. The Islamist insurgents fought against the government winning control of most of Southern Somalia by late 2008.
The absence of a long-standing government led to the rise of piracy as the only means of survival for the population which has seen a civil war for the past 20 years, combats with grinding poverty and hunger, shifting alliances, and international intervention with a steady supply of unemployed young men and cheap weapons.
While the internationally recognized government of President Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmad struggles to gain control of is own capital city of Mogadishu, political stability remains a distant dream. In 2009, the Al-Shabab (maning ‘the youth’ in Arabic), drove Hizbul Islam out of the Southern port of the city and has declared its open alliance to Al-Qaeda emerging as the most powerful Islamic insurgent group in the region.
What Somalia needs is to end this internal warfare for which it requires international alliance which can be sought from nearby countries like Eritrea, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Qatar for training and equipping the country’s security forces.
An intriguing question is: Will Somalia see the return of UN peacekeeping forces in order to quell the chaos and lawlessness? This refreshes the memory of the 1993 peacekeeping mission when the bodies of the US soldiers were stripped naked and dragged through the streets of Mogadishu. What is expected of a peacekeeping mission is that the Al-Shabab will simply scatter and resurface once the peacekeepers run out of funds and leave forcing the region to become even more chaotic and dangerous.
This week Somalia’s 19th Prime Minister Omar Abdirashid Ali Sharmarke resigned as the government’s failure to put an end to Islamist insurgency and the death of thousands of civilians continues. The outside world has for too long seen Somalia as a threat to its own security as a major exporter of terror. The piracy issue appears to have a silver lining as it may lead to a greater, and more serious engagement of the world with Somalia’s political and developmental problems, perhaps encouraging involvement in ending its chronic instability.
Samana Ali
FY-K
FY-K
Saturday, September 18, 2010
Pakistan and Conspiracy Theories
We, as a nation, are obsessed with conspiracy theories. It’s become our national pastime. It’s fashionable to attribute everything from the floods to the cricket scandal to a global conspiracy against Pakistan.
It’s suprising to see the number of ‘educated’ individuals of the bourgeois who think that the world as we know it is run by a group of Zionist Jews who sit in a secret room deep in the Pentagon and conspire against Pakistan. There, this cabal wearing black robes and holding bloody daggers thinks of ways to undermine our nation. They used HAARP to cause the floods. And Photoshop to incriminate our cricketers. And don’t forget how the lasers they had hidden in the Margalla hills shot down the Air Blue jet.
9/11 must have been a conspiracy and the suicide attacks that bleed Pakistan continously could never have been done by the Taliban. It must be a Zionist-Hindu-American-Blackwater-Xe conspiracy. Haven’t you heard that the bombers were actually Sikh RAW agents in disguise? It’s all India’s doing. They are the ones causing agitation in Balochistan. They are the ones who fight us with ‘water terrosism’, whatever that is. Pakistan is under developed because of the Illuminati and Freemasons. Not because of years of military dictatorship that left only one viable instituition in the country: the army.
Democracy is an evil, ‘Western’, ‘forgein’ concept. And how can it work in a country where the ‘masses’ are illiterate? And since politics is dirty and democracy clearly isn’t for us, let’s have ‘enlightened despotism’. We are an idiotic nation that needs a dashing ruler on horseback (and in his khaki uniform). Oh and give him a big stick to keep us in line.
This is the kind of garbage that is floated about in our drawing rooms and by our civil society.
But why are we so vulnerable to these ‘theories’? Conspiracy theories offer an easy way out. They seem to reduce the complex, chaotic social earthquakes of our world into a managable, nay, fantastic framework that is as spectacular as it is sinister.
These theories speak of a deep insecurity. They speak of a deep-seated desire to know that social ripples are not random but are systematic, thought-out, long-term strategies by a cabal of men. Psychologists attribute this belief to a need by some to know that man isn’t adrift but part of a scheme. This belief further implies that the evil group can be defeated (or joined).
Conspiracy theories are an easy way out. Unfortunately, we are at a stage where there are no shortcuts, no ‘quick-fixes’. Instead of looking outward, it’s time for us to look in and see what we have become. It’s easy to place the blame on outside forces and that is exactly what we are guilty of doing.
Enough of this nonsense! Enough of this intolerance! Enough of this myopia! Instead of sipping coffee and bemoaning the state of the our ‘becharay’ proletariat, Pakistan’s ‘educated’ class would do well to get up and help Pakistan achieve it’s rightful place among the civilised nations of the world.
This requires constructive critisism, not blatant pessimism. It requires us to use our common sense. It requires tolerance of those who are different in religion, ethnicity and political ideology. It requires us to actually listen to the other person’s point of view before agreeing or disagreeing. How someone who does not know and practice this can claim to be ‘educated’ is beyond me. But Pakistan is full to the seams with such educated illiterates.
Although it’s now clichéd, Kennedy was right on the mark when he said that ‘ask not what your country can do for you, ask what YOU can do for your country’.
Pakistan Zindabad!
M. S. Najam FY-W
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Kenya In Crisis
Kenya used to be considered one of the most stable nations in Africa. But come December, 2007, that reputation was shattered, and it won a new one – the most violent democracy in the world. Following massive controversy and rigging allegations, which were confirmed by foreign observers, violence broke out on a colossal scale across the once-peaceful nation. The government, and President Mwai Kubeki, were condemned for rigging the polls, and the opposition, led by Raila Odinga and his Orange Democratic Movement gave vent to its rage by instigating the public and in the days that followed, over 900 people lost their lives.
Up to 600,000 people have been displaced following the chaos. The largest single loss of life was when a church providing shelter from the violence to 200 people was set alight by rioters, burning 35 people to death. The people who were sheltering were members of President Kibaki’s tribe, the Kikuyu, against whom the ODM have been accused of facilitating violence. Age-old tribal rifts have been torn open again by the polls, and in areas like the Rift Valley, where different tribes used to live together harmoniously, rape, kidnappings and, quite simply, racial violence and hatred have one again come to the fore. Yet it is Kenya’s poor who are pitted against each other, those who live without running water, and with infant mortality rates up to 7 times the national average. Those who have least are those who are losing the most. Another important issue has also sprung up; namely, the results of the massive fear and hectic violence nation-wide on the country’s numerous AIDs patients. Out of 600,000 people who have been displaced in Kenya’s post-election violence, at least 15,000 are HIV-positive.
Health officials are still trying to assess the impact six weeks of violence has had on the country’s battle with AIDs.
Just how big a setback this has been may only emerge once a durable peace deal is in place – for some AIDs patients that might simply be too late.
The economy has been hard-hit as well, as Kenya’s main industry, tourism, went down the drain, following foreign fears and international media coverage of the hectic state of the country. Tourism was on the crest of a wave. It was the country’s top foreign revenue earner and brought in about $1bn last year. And yet over the last month, over 20,000 people working in tourism have lost their jobs. The other big industry was also linked to tourism – horticulture, a thriving sector, with 65% of Kenya’s vegetables and flowers making their way to Europe. A recent meeting of 300 heads of Kenyan industry drew up a report estimating the damage to the economy. They suggested that the chaos of the past few weeks would cost $3.6bn by the end of the year, and as many as half a million people could lose their jobs. It is not a pretty picture, and such estimates simply strengthen the fears that the effects of this crisis will be felt for a long, long time, across many different strata.
There is a valuable example here for us in this country, a vision of what can happen when elections are controversial, rigged or simply not a capable of truly transmitting the views of the people. It is a blessing for Pakistan that we had such a peaceful election, widely hailed as relatively fair, with results accepted on all sides. Yet there is a warning in the Kenya example for politicians too – rousing the rabble may be effective as a show of strength, but it can quickly, and heartrendingly, spiral out of control. The politics of moderation are what is needed, the world over, without manipulation or instigation, but with just one all-important element: human participation, and the transmission of the people’s voices.
By: Akbar S Ahmed
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
United Nations : The Only Security
This is a response to a previously written post, ‘United Nations: A False Security.’
Many have attacked the United Nations for its debilitating veto powers. Some may go so far as to cite examples of the failure of the United Nations. They may point to conflict torn regions such as Kashmir, Congo and Iraq. It is true that there cannot always be a consensus on affairs. It is also true that the United Nations was seemingly powerless at the brink of nuclear devastation in the form of the threat posed by the Cold War. However such critics fail to see the valuable contribution of the United Nations to our World.
To start with the United Nations goes further than its predecessor the League of Nations which faltered before the outbreak of war in 1939. History is not repeating itself because this new peace body has the essentials necessary to prevent conflict. The United Nations has a peace keeping force which is and has been active. We can consider the example of the peace forces going to enter Darfur alongside the African Union forces. The various peace patrol missions and skirmishes in Kashmir also compliment such claims. There efforts are concentrated against insurgents and warlords who promote further instability in these regions.
There would be no room for diplomacy and negotiation without the United Nations. The purpose of the organization is to unite nations by bringing them together in the form of council meetings and assembly style meetings. In other words nations are presented with a uniform viable platform for them to discuss matters of interest. This reduces the margin for misunderstanding and suspicion greatly. We’ve all seen the Cold War with the United Nations , but what we need to ask ourselves is could there be a Cold War without a United nations. Without effective communication the world would have slipped into the bowels of nuclear catastrophe. So when the allies sat down at Potsdam and Yalta in 1945 ;not only did they sow the seeds for a future Cold war , they set the boundaries for that very war by establishing the United Nations. They ensured that this war would never become too severe. They secured a Cold war – a word of wards and terror rather than weapons and confrontation.
The United Nations protects the very rights that we live by. It guarantees us the right of property, religion and self determination. We are protected by the International code and are given rights that no tyrant, dictator can rightfully deny us. The United Nations has prepared a more liberal, open world for us. We can breathe without the fear of some government robbing us of our rights and dignity. There is that assuring promise of someone above holding criminals accountable. And Indeed the The Hague in Holland serves as a court to international crimes. Terrorists such as Bin Laden are a concern for the international community at large rather than just one nation. On similar grounds intellectual property and patents are protected by the WTO, IMF and other such organizations. War criminals are brought before a court and held responsible for the various atrocities. A free world exists where justice and human rights is extended to all.
When we think about the United Nations we must embrace it as a savior and protector. It would be unfair to dismiss it as a biased puppet of any nation or regime. The U.N brings peace, justice and freedom to every corner of the globe. It links us and firms the bond of one people, one world and one struggle. We are bound together with love and respect for humanity. In my opinion there could be no greater service to mankind.
Shahryar Malik
Monday, July 16, 2007
The Growing Divide
Over the last year the divide between Russia and the West has been steadily increasing. Matters have come to a head just recently when party leader Vladimir Putin suspended Russia’s involvement in the CFE agreement (Conventional Forces In Europe). This was a key post cold war settlement and Putin’s decision has been seen as a dangerous political message. It is quite obvious now that the brief meetings between Putin and President George Bush did not amount to much. Can we see the escalating situation as a renewed Cold war?
Whether or not we are seeing history repeat itself, a re-occurrence of “containment” or just some claims for equal treatment from Moscow; this matter is bound to have some serious repercussions. The United Nations Security council for one is going to fall victim to this new political episode. Important matters such as Iran, Korea and the future of Kosovo are currently being pressed through the UN negotiations. If Vladimir Putin’s aggression continues than we may see the re-emergence of the notorious and infamous Russian veto vote in the United Nations. The political stand off or stalemate as we may call it will only produce harmful effects which will hamper peace efforts in the United Nations. Having said this we must also be aware of the weakened state of the Russia.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989 the country shrunk in size, strength and power. It lacks the ability to play the war of words with the United States. This new aggressive Russia also lacks the much needed allies to pursue such a policy. However what we are seeing here is definitely a renewal of will. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, Russia backed of from the political limelight. It focused more on cooperation with the West alongside peaceful co-existence.
As party matters collapsed into internal affairs with Boris Yeltsin and the following presidents – Russia’s problems became more internalized. The international scene became a smaller sphere of influence for Russian affairs. Now Russia stands up to the West for the first time, in a very long time. We find ourselves asking questions of the past. Can there once again be two power blocs? Will there be a balance of terror? Is this the beginning of a second Cold war?
Shahryar Malik
Monday, July 2, 2007
The New Great Game
Since the 19th century there has been a battle raging in Central Asia. Russia urged on by Napoleon fumbled for imperialist possessions in the region. In fact the Tsar and Napoleon came to an agreement to conquer and divide the world together. However the splendid British Raj in India was to play a pivotal role in Britain’s desire for the status quo in the region. Both super powers were therefore forced into a battle which has become famous as “The Great Game.”
With the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989 a power vacuum has once again engulfed the region. There is an opening with key players such as the fundamentalist Taliban.
With the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989 a power vacuum has once again engulfed the region. There is an opening with key players such as the fundamentalist Taliban.
The U.S has tried to fill the gap as they see fit. The truth of the matter is that today’s current state of Afghanistan is really a legacy of the Cold War. The “Afghan Miracle” as we may call it here in Pakistan was a disastrous campaign for the Soviet Union. Funds were poured in from left right and centre to bolster the Taliban regime against the Russians. As the two new super powers confronted each other in the effort to install puppet regimes – a divided and un-stable Afghanistan began to emerge. This legacy would toil on for another century producing terrorism, war and conflict in the region. It was this very legacy that would give rise to the notorious Osama Bin Laden and guerrilla warriors of the Middle East. It’s surprising to me that when people talk about the end of the Cold War we always look back at the remains of the infamous Berlin Wall. What we all should be looking at instead is the situation in Afghanistan; right at our own doorstep.
There are many differences between the old great game and the new great game. The former was fought for glory and the quest for an Asiatic empire. However today’s great game is far pettier. Its motives lie in the abundance of oil and mineral deposits in the region. We have seen the game manifest itself in the U.S invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Were these countries really thriving with the alleged weapons of mass destruction or was there just another obvious power vacuum? One thing is for certain, the more the Bush administration commits itself to war in the region: more and more illiterate locals will be forced to take up arms in the form of terrorist plots and suicide bombings. The tragedy of September the 11th could not have happened without the attack on Afghanistan. Similarly the invasion of Iraq will only act as a fuelling agent in the force of anti-U.S global terrorism. It is a simple case of cause and effect.
The Afghani people share a common hatred for foreigners or “khar.” They could not tolerate the Russians for their atheist beliefs. How can we truly expect them to accept an American presence in their homeland when even Pakistanis are dismembered from the Afghan fraternity? My answer to this Middle Eastern problem is that the Afghani and Iraqi people should not be provoked further. Just like the once divided Berlin, this legacy too can only be solved with time and patience. If the Western world and the United States just back away from the region they will have more to gain than to lose. Peace and stability will descend upon a region which has been torn apart by chaos and turmoil for not decades but centuries. The Afghani people should be left alone to resolve their problem. If they choose to end up in a world veiled by Talibanisation than that is their choice in the free world. The United States government is walking a tight rope. It cannot afford to make any more enemies in the region with the imminent threat of Iran and the Uranium enrichment programme. So in a nutshell, if there is this “problem” in Afghanistan, it is a problem for Afghanistan and the Afghani people alone. Continued American presence in the region will only encourage and not deter terrorist factions.
In the end this new great game has created a very volatile Middle East. The issues of Israel/Palestine are spilling over into Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan. Gone are the days of isolated wars and battles between nations. The next major upheaval in the region will send a shockwave of domino effects through the region and at once all the powers big and small will be involved. There will be no more room for diplomacy with factions such as Al Qaeda, Hammas pushing matters to a head. There will be no room for peace negotiations. The cause will be long but forgotten and mankind will sprawl into a hopeless war where missiles and suicide bombings will rule supreme.
Shahryar Malik
Friday, April 13, 2007
A Freer World
If Democracy means extending government for the people, by the people and a parliament aims for unanimous decision: should we really include those who limit the functions of a democratic process in a democracy? In every other third world country Islamic fundamentalists seem to be stemming the tide for reform and progress. They call for the full implementation of the Shariah or Islamic law. For them this is the sole approach to politics and the only way ahead. Recently the regime in Egypt is seriously considering the removal of Islamic fundamentalists from the parliamentary process. This might just be a wise decision.
The one essential thing we must understand about this position is that the Shariah law cannot be implemented in a modern day’s society. The full Shariah law in its entirety would call upon acts of punishments such as Stoning to death, castration and flogging. This can only be seen as crude and primitave rationale in the 21stcentruy. And if you may ask why refer to such punishments as un-fit, the answer is simple. Mankind has progressed beyond that stage in evolution. The French revolutionaries in 1789 marked a turn from the gruesome means of torture prevalent under absolutism. The revolution conceived the guillotine. Although this may seem horrible today, it was perhaps the most forgiving way to punish someone in that century. The iron blade would come clambering down on the criminal and within an an instant he was killed. Within an instant he was set free. Therefore humanity should not stand in oblivion to the progress they have so skillfully made over the centuries. We must accept developments and move with the times rather than idealize about turning back the clocks.
Islamic fundamentalism is a dangerous threat to regimes and coalition governments in the third world. It is almost tradition for each party to have at least some elements of fundamentalism on their agenda. This is particularly prevalent in Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan. Both conservative and liberal parties appropriate Fundamentalism into their campaigns to boost popularity and support. The reason for this is evident. These countries have a narrow middle class electoral participation rate. With the majority of the lower groups of society remaining illiterate, it is only the religiously minded who jump to the call to give in their votes in the polls. Inevitably they chose to vote for the fundamentalists and their extremist propositions. Governments find themselves walking a tight rope. On one side they have their agenda and policy to consider. And on the other hand there remain those unfulfilled promises of bringing Islamic reform into the constitution.
These act as curbs on the entire government process. The government is forced to appease its poll supporters and cannot carry out simple policy. Even the most basic of reforms must be submitted for the approval of the fundamentalists. This makes us question as to who is really in power of the government. Martial law administrators are no exception to this. General Zia and General Pervez Musharraf have both followed a tight policy aimed at pacifying the fundamentalists. Terrorist cell activities and the works of A.Q khan have all been defended for this fundamentalist end.
When we hear pleas from Amnesty Internationals to Egypt to re-consider its move against fundamentalists we really wonder what the basis of their argument is. Are human rights being violated by banning fundamentalists from the parliament or are rights being violated by allowing them to be there.
Shahryar Malik FY
Friday, February 16, 2007
The Israeli Paradox
Most people consider the new Middle-East a more stable region compared to that of the 1980’s and 1990’s. The changes in the balance of power in this geography have probably been the most significant developments of the last decade. However, it is likely that to this day the region remains as volatile as it was in the past, as claims one professor at the University of California at Berkeley. “Within the last nine years there has been an undeniable restructuring in the state of affairs of the Arab East, but the extent to which these changes have brought progress is difficult to evaluate… There still remains a Hegemonic Nuclear Israel surrounded by non-nuclear antagonistic Arab states”.
To suggest that the situation today is superior to that of ten years ago would be of little value, without investigating the Middle-East conflicts of 2006-2008. For that purpose I present a précis of where the world was headed almost a decade ago.
As the ‘War on Terror’ raged on it became evident that Iraq would not escape civil war. Former President of the United States of America George.W.Bush made one last attempt to stabilize the situation with an added 30,000 troops, raising the levels to 160,000. Unfortunately, the anarchy continued and the Americans remained unwilling to accept that their strategy of intervention had failed. No WMDs were ever found.
The end of the war correlated with the end of the Republican term in the White House and the beginning of the First woman President of the United States’ term, President Hillary Rodham Clinton. Furthermore, in 2006 the Israel-Lebanon conflict had left Israel reeling from its poor performance against Hezbollah. The country suffered further diplomatically when the President was put on open trial for allegations of sexual wrongdoing and ethical misconduct (a first in Israeli history).
In Lebanon civil strife had begun, the political party Hezbollah openly challenged the democratically elected government. The government remained defiant despite paralyzing strikes and the country continued to recover from damage done during the Israeli-Lebanese air-strikes.
In Palestine serious conflict broke out between the Hamas group (legitimately elected) and the Fattah group. The EU was keen to play an important role, and former President Jimmy Carter (Nobel Prize laureate) released the critically acclaimed book ‘Peace not Apartheid’, a significant stepping stone on the way to resolving the Palestinian conflict. The book later became a voice for the Palestinians in the international forum.
In Palestine serious conflict broke out between the Hamas group (legitimately elected) and the Fattah group. The EU was keen to play an important role, and former President Jimmy Carter (Nobel Prize laureate) released the critically acclaimed book ‘Peace not Apartheid’, a significant stepping stone on the way to resolving the Palestinian conflict. The book later became a voice for the Palestinians in the international forum.
Today little remains the same. It wasn’t soon after Iran tried to develop its nuclear potential that the United States and its allies moved in to redraw the map of the Middle-East. In Clinton’s first year as president we saw the reorganization of the Iraqi state in to 3 sub-divisions, namely New Iraq, Greater Baghdad and Kurdistan. The divisions were made according to religious sects; the Sunnis hold majority in New Iraq and the Shias in Greater Baghdad, while the Kurds are the majority in Kurdistan. Many Middle-East analysts argue that this separation was unneeded as the violence almost completely came to an end with the withdrawal of the coalition forces. Today the three states share a common foreign policy and defensive strategy but have independent democratically elected rulers present. Today more visits are made by Greater Baghdad government officials to Iran, than to its neighboring country New Iraq. Today we see more segregation than ever before. “Ask the common man and he will tell you that even Saddam Hussein’s regime was better than this” says Middle-East analyst Riz Khan from the Al-Jazeerah network. Mr. Khan strongly believes that the Iraqis don’t actually like the state division but are apathetic towards it, as what they remember from before the division was much worse. At the least we must acknowledge that the Iraqi state federation is no longer in the shape it was in 2006.
Moving further west we have the second Israeli-Lebanese conflict in ten years. The Israeli government attacked the southern border of Lebanon in June 2009. It claimed its legitimacy over this attack as a hunt for terrorist organizations creating unrest in Tel Aviv.
Initially, Lebanon was carved out by the British in its de-colonization period. Since then there has been perpetual conflict between the two countries. This was the third attempt by Israel in the occupation of Lebanon’s southern territories and finally one that seems permanent. Greater Israel today comprises of territories once considered a large portion of Lebanon. 7 years after the conflict came to an end and no significant terrorist groups were uncovered, 30,000 Israeli troops still remain in the southern region bordering what remains of Lebanon today.
Initially, Lebanon was carved out by the British in its de-colonization period. Since then there has been perpetual conflict between the two countries. This was the third attempt by Israel in the occupation of Lebanon’s southern territories and finally one that seems permanent. Greater Israel today comprises of territories once considered a large portion of Lebanon. 7 years after the conflict came to an end and no significant terrorist groups were uncovered, 30,000 Israeli troops still remain in the southern region bordering what remains of Lebanon today.
The greatest celebration in the Middle-East lay with the long awaited independence of Palestine, finally recognized by Israel. Some say that this had to do with mounting pressure from the EU. Others say it was because Israel had then recently captured significant Lebanese territory and felt it must give up one to gain the other permanently. Today the Palestinians share a legitimate seat in the U.N and although they celebrated independence officially in late 2009 there is still recognizable Israeli influence in respect to the military and administration, not allowing significant anti-Israeli elements to enter the Palestinian government.
Israel has undoubtedly been the largest cause of change in the Middle-East in the last decade. It was Israel that finally headed the anti-Iran military campaign. Although not done at ground level, it was Israeli pilots that were marked for actually having bombed the Iranian Nuclear Reactors. The unrest that followed was probably the worst to date and there is no doubt that today Iran is considered a member of the Axis of Evil ‘neutralized’ by the West. The Iranians on the other hand, will not forget this ‘injustice’ that easily, as their nuclear aims did not violate the rules and regulations of the NPT or the IAEA. We can rest assured that the passivity of the Iranians today will not last. Iran has had its Nuclear program completely dismantled and is going through the vestiges of the stringent U.N sanctions that have lasted almost six complete years.
Has the Middle-East become more stable in the last decade? The answer to that question lies in rather indirect factual information. Firstly, the United States enjoys a strong military base in the United Arab Emirates. A document was declassified last year claiming that they have a well-secured and stable energy policy in place. Secondly, Israel significantly dominates the region with no close competition. It seems Iran will never successfully develop a nuclear energy program as it has been classified as a rogue state. Thus by linking the causes to the initial instability in the region we can conclude that today there is little threat of war. A success in the form of Palestinian independence pacifies others that may have been a threat to peace. However, there is still no balance of power. Perhaps it is not possible to attain balance in the world’s most volatile region. “It won’t be soon till the Iranians retaliate, and then the Lebanese soon after that” says Riz Khan. “It’s only a matter of time”.
Eman Niazi FY
Tuesday, November 7, 2006
Remembering the Day of Reckoning
It will soon be a year since the earthquake struck our northern lands. Much has been said about the devastation caused by the disaster and even more has been said about the inefficiency of our government. Articles pertaining to both these things have found their way time and again on the front pages of newspapers and equal coverage has been given to these issues in the media.
However, amidst all this negativity, one major positive aspect has been ignored. No one has really come up and celebrated the spirit shown by the whole Pakistani nation. This spirit was something that rose out of nowhere. In fact, many people in the past have doubted the ability of this nation to rise in the time of need and devastation, and yet, when the earthquake struck, it woke up the nationalistic spirit within our society that had been dormant.
From thousands of volunteers working day and night at the PAF Air Base to hundreds of groups going to the north to help in the rehabilitation of the survivors, our people, especially the youth did more than what was expected of them. People who had observed our society for many years were overwhelmed with this sudden national unity and the were forced to applaud the wonderful effort of our people.
It is true that a lot more could have been done had the government and the respective agencies been efficient. It is also true that a lot of funds went missing and it is also true that a significant amount of supplies for the earthquake survivors found there way into the markets. But these actions aren’t representative of the average Pakistani. In fact, it may well be correct to say that the government and the agencies are not clear representatives of our people!
I felt proud to hear an elderly person tell me that the effort he had seen by the Pakistani youth had reminded him of the war effort in 1965 and the unity shown by the people freshened his memories of the unity that the Pakistani people had shown at the time of independence. i felt proud because my generation had done something parallel to the great feats that those before us had accomplished.
As I know look in the past at that day of reckoning, I realize that even though the earthquakes destroyed the homes of our brothers and sisters, it woke up the sleeping giant that had been within us for a long time. And i believe that along with expressing sorrow over what happened a year ago, we must also celebrate the spirit that this nation showed after that day of reckoning
Uzair M. Younis SY-L
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)