By K Gajendra Singh
Purbanchal, March 4, 2005
They way US led Western media hyped and serenaded US President George W.Bush’s fence mending sweep across Brussels, Paris , Mainz ending in the Bratislava summit with Russian leader Vladimir Putin , it should have ended him declaring like Julius Caesar did in 78 BC ,Veni, vidi, vici ("I came, I saw, I conquered") at a town called Zile, 300 kilometers northeast of Ankara, after a four hour battle victory over Pharnaces II, son of the great Mithradates VI of Pontus ,who had contested Imperial Rome's hegemony in Asia Minor. Instead , after 3 hours of frank discussions it looked like ‘ I came, I saw –‘ but “I was deflated”.
The author surfed western TV channels after the summit , but perhaps embarrassed at the denouement there was only an abbreviated joint press conference , other wise it would have played many times over like the toppling of Saddam Hussein statue or “the Mission accomplished .“
Even in US Midwest , Denver Post described Bush-Putin tensions palpable and observed that ‘George W Bush and Vladimir Putin looked friendly enough -- They called each other by first names, a diplomatic gimmick we don't pretend to understand. But it seemed clear from their subdued body language that there was lingering tension after a closed-door summit –“ The old cold warrior William Saffire told CNN that Bush had blinked . Yes , that is true , faced with a revived bear ,the Iraq wounded eagle blinked in Bratislava.
Of course, the propagandist of the self-styled successors of Imperial Rome, the hawks in the US administration, had hoped to sing paeans to Bush emulating Caesar, or at least like Reagan-Gorbachev summit.
According to extracts from Washington Post’s verbatim record Bush thanked Putin for “since September the 11th, for clearly understanding the stakes they faced. Every time we meet we have an interesting and constructive strategy session about how to continue to protect our peoples from attack. He has confronted some serious attacks in his country. I know what that means as a fellow leader. I know the strain, I know the agony, I know the sadness, I know the emotion that comes with seeing innocent people lose their lives. And we have shared that. I hope we never have to share it again, that common situation. “
Bush said that they had agreed that Iran should not have a nuclear weapon. “And I appreciate Vladimir's understanding on that issue. We had a very constructive dialogue about how to achieve that common goal. And we agreed that North Korea should not have a nuclear weapon. And, again, this is an area where we're working closely together as two nations of the five nations that are involved with North Korea. “
“And we agreed to accelerate negotiations for Russia's entry into the WTO. I stated that the other day in Brussels. And we talked about ways to move this process forward. “
Bush also said that they agreed to work together to find peace in the Middle East.” Russia's a part of the quartet, and they played a constructive role in establishing the road map, and now we look forward to working together to achieve peace.”
Putin replied that Russia was ready for a reasonable compromise. But this compromise should not go beyond the usual responsibilities as seen by countries acceding to the WTO.
On democracy Putin said that ‘ we discussed these issues at length, face-to-face, just the two of us. Russia has made its choice in favor of democracy. Fourteen years ago, independently, without any pressure from outside, it made that decision in the interest of itself, in the interest of its people, of its citizens.
“ This is our final choice and we have no way back. There can be no return to what we used to have before. And the guarantee for this is the choice of the Russian people themselves. No guarantees from outside cannot be provided. This is impossible. It would be impossible for Russia today. Any kind of turn toward totalitarianism for Russia would be impossible due to the condition of the Russian society.
“First, we are not going to make up, to invent any kind of special Russian democracy. We're going to remain committed to the fundamental principles of democracy that have been established in the world. But, of course, all the modern institutions of democracy, the principles of democracy, should be adequate to the current status of the development of Russia, to our history and our traditions.
“There is nothing unusual here either. In every country, these overall principles are embodied that way, in electoral law. We can compare the United States and a number of European countries in the operation of major democratic institutions. There may be some differences, but the main fundamental principles are going to be implemented in the form in which they're developed by the modern, civilized society. --But I believe that -- and a lot of people will agree with me -- the implementation of the principles and norms of democracy should not be accompanied by the collapse of the state and impoverishment of the people.
After the summit Putin said that "I am satisfied with the meeting and with the results of the meeting," He added that his frank discussion with Bush was useful although he made clear Russia did not accept being lectured by the West on how to run its affairs. "The meeting was very positive both in terms of its atmosphere and the choice of topics," Putin added.
Imperial USA and its European Satrapies ;
But first the journey to his satrapies , the Europe Union and Nato . The US-Europe unity after Bush’s meetings with European leaders was aptly summed up by the Guardian –“For the moment, to adapt Mahatma Gandhi's acerbic opinion about western civilisation, one can only say that such unity would be a fine thing.”
In the author’s view, there is an existential misunderstanding between USA and Europe about the global 'war on terror' or the 'war against tyranny', as Washington puts it .After September 11 , the Americans believe that the world has changed , while others say that USA has changed ( for the worse ). It was a reality check to US , whose reaction has been excessive, brutal and shocking for the world . Europeans know terrorism ; the British with the IRA, Italians and Germans with their Red Brigades, the Spanish with the Basque separatist Eta, French with Corsicans and so on. So what , there is no need to go overboard. And so do Turks and Indians .But USA has done little to keep its promise to Ankara on Turkey’s Kurdish insurgents sheltered in North Iraq or take with Islamabad Indian complaints about Jihadis and terrorists in Pakistan , documented in US government reports.
Cold Warriors like Vice President Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and even Condoleezza Rice , in spite of Iraqi quagmire want to maintain 'full spectrum dominance' .Europe is seen not as “a partner for peace in a multi-polar world, but as a useful, if sometimes troublesome partner , to bolster its own position in a uni-polar one. Superpowers are on a high , hyper power is high on a cocktail of many ingredients . If Europe is to be a partner it will be only as a junior .” Thus the differences with Europe on stabilization of Iraq , the security of oil the Gulf and the Caspian , China's military and economic potential, Afghanistan, nuclear proliferation in the context of North Korea and Iran remain.
Bush’s charm offensive with French and German leaders was not a great success either, in spite of many “bon mots “ ,nor earlier of Ms Rice ‘s safari , when she was politely listened to and equally politely applauded .Europeans , including Tony Blair wonder now that Bush has been re-elected , how to square the circle . But Bush’s conciliatory words fell short of offering substantive changes in US policy.
Declaring that the US stands "proudly" in the tradition of the Magna Carta and the Declaration of the Rights of Man, Bush won applause when he told an invited audience in Brussels: "When Europe and America stand together, no problem can stand against us." But after Guantamano, Abu Gharaib and Fallujah these words sound hollow.
Summit; Western media coverage;
According to the Western media the dominating issue was US concern that Putin was backsliding on Russia's democracy. He has taken steps to recentralize power - eliminating elections of provincial governors, restricting the media, intimidating critics, ousting opposition legislators, and interfering with Russian oil giant Yukos.
USA Today said that they called each other 'George' and 'Vladimir' and insisted they remain good friends. But their body language spoke volumes ... Mr Putin barely smiled. Mr Bush at times seemed ill at ease. Back-slapping and soul-searching were out. Sparring about democracy was in ... . For all of Mr Putin's rhetorical commitment to democracy, his actions will speak more loudly."
Boston Globe said "If Mr Putin expects to gain entry to the WTO, he will have no choice but to meet WTO terms and cease staging sham legal procedures and phony auctions to steal energy companies such as the oil giant Yukos from impertinent private owners ... Bush should be telling Mr Putin that the path to Russian prosperity and security must pass through a political resolution of the war in Chechnya, removal of Russian military bases from Georgia, an end to meddling in Ukrainian politics, the creation of an honest and independent judiciary at home, and a decision to refrain from changing the Russian constitution to allow himself a third term. Those are tickets Mr Putin should have to punch if he wants to become a full-fledged member of the democratic club."
London Economist , a loyal US supporter with its elegant English , described Russia as a medium-sized country whose global importance is still fading but which still has plenty of scope for troublemaking—and a huge nuclear arsenal said that Bush who had ‘urged European Union leaders to join him in pressing Mr Putin to recommit himself to “democratic reform”, following several recent moves in which the Russian leader has seemed to be taking Russia back towards its authoritarian past , used the word “candid” to describe their discussion on this matter. As Mr Bush breezily reiterated -- the concerns he had expressed about the rule of law, press freedom and other democratic institutions in Russia, Mr Putin stood beside him, stony-faced.
Economist did admit that “Mr Putin insisted Russia would not slide back towards totalitarianism and -—arguing that candidates for governor would have to be approved by the elected regional assemblies, -- that this was no less democratic than the electoral-college system used to choose American presidents. Then like others in Western media ,a former Prime Minsiter Kasyanov news conference in Moscow and his attack on Putin's record on basic rights --to challenge him for the presidency in the 2008 elections, at the head of a pro-democracy coalition ,was splashed .
Economist also mentioned “the disregard for the rule of law that he has shown in destroying Yukos, an energy giant; by his brutal military campaign to try to crush separatism in Chechnya; and by the scrapping of elections for regional governors. He is also helping Iran to build its civilian nuclear capabilities (which, America fears, could aid the Islamic republic’s clandestine atomic-weapons programme).-- And he is negotiating to sell advanced military hardware to Syria.”
If anything it was Bush who was ill at ease while Putin looked charged like a Judo black belt which he is . But then Economist splashes Rose revolution in Georgia and Orange revolution in Ukraine , but does not follow up as new rulers , with western wives ,installed with western money , training and muscle are turning out to be more authoritarian and wealth grabbers .
West was so happy to have Gorbachev’s de-structuring of the powerful Soviet state without any returns and Yeltsin , under whom public assets were sold for nothing and hundreds of billions of dollars transferred to western banks and institutions .
In New York Times ,Elisabeth Bumiller and David E Sanger commented that Bush expressed concern about Russia's commitment to democracy in a sometimes tense and awkward encounter with Putin , who at times visibly uncomfortable, refused to yield. When pressed “Mr. Putin tartly responded that he would listen to some of Mr. Bush's ideas but not comment on others and said that debating "whether we have more or less democracy is not the right thing to do." The Russian president also said that the American Electoral College was in essence a "secret ballot" and pointedly noted, "It is not considered undemocratic, is it?"
Another report observed that there was no major agreement reached as a result of Bush and Putin meeting, except for few modest agreements, some already committed to, on trade, energy and nuclear proliferation. They agreed to limit the spread of the shoulder-fired missiles called Man-Portable Air Defense Systems ( which Russia has agreed to supply to Syria).Remember the US sidewinder missiles which US distributed like confetti to Mujahaddins in Afganistan but came to haunt it . Another instance of not well thought out policies and their consequences.
In the same paper ,Strobe Talbott, former deputy secretary of state , now president of the Brookings Institution , who was kept at bay by Indian Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh after India’s nuclear tests in April, 1998 , referred to demands by some influential Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. Congress to expel Russia from Group of 8 rich nations . Group of 7 invited Mikhail Gorbachev as a reward (for loosening the iron grip of Soviet power) .Yeltsin as the democratically elected president of post-Soviet Russia, was granted full membership in 1998.But being a diplomat of long standing he urged that it would only play into the hands of nationalist forces in Russia , which suffer from all the ills of the world . He then hopefully suggested that others close ranks behind Bush and Blair and use the next 16 months for a campaign of quiet calibrated diplomacy and tell Putin - reform or otherwise.
Fox Channel describing Bush's Europe Trip - Mission Accomplished? claimed that” White House officials are celebrating that they have found some common ground with European allies on helping in Iraq — even among those who opposed the war. “
Under subtitle “A Public Whipping? , it becomes coy ,”But some wondered why Bush didn't more publicly express his displeasure with his foreign counterpart, particularly since he stressed in this year's inaugural address the need to spread democracy. "Privately, I was hoping the president would take a sharper line" with Putin, P.J. Crowley, former special assistant to President Clinton, told FOX News. "He [Bush] clearly went to bat for democracy yesterday, [but] I thought he swung and missed."
Hardly a stinging rebuke
Ian Traynor said in the Guardian that “Putin responded robustly to the suspicions about his rule, declaring that Russian democracy had already passed the point of no return. Russia, he said, had opted for democracy 14 years ago, not to do anyone else's bidding but for its own sake. "This is our final choice and there can be no way back ... --. "We discussed these issues at length, face to face, just the two of us."
A “leader’ in the same paper said that” despite Mr Bush's warning in Brussels earlier in the week that Russia "must renew a commitment to democracy and the rule of law" , he only spoke of his "concerns", about "the rule of law, protection of minorities and a free press and a viable political opposition", while immediately paying tribute to the "tremendous progress and amazing transformation" that had taken place since the demise of the Soviet Union. Hardly a stinging rebuke, but better than nothing.
“ None of this sits easily with Mr Bush's strident emphasis on democracy, whose advances he trumpets in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine and Ukraine, where old regimes have been supplanted by American military muscle in the first two cases and western-assisted people power in the others.”
Bush has reached a dead end in his foreign policy ‘
A touch of reality was injected by Sidney Blumenthal also in Guardian - Lost in Europe , “President Bush has reached a dead end in his foreign policy, but he has failed to recognise his quandary. His belief that the polite reception he received in Europe is a vindication of his previous adventures is a vestige of fantasy. --He gives no indication that he grasps the exhaustion of his policy. His reductio ad absurdum was reached with his statement on Iran: "This notion that the US is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous. And having said that, all options are on the table." Including, presumably, the "simply ridiculous". --Bush - who, according to European officials, has no sense of what to do - is boxed in, whether he understands it or not.
“The secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, seeking to impress French intellectuals while in Paris, referred to Iran as totalitarian, as if the authoritarian Shia regime neatly fitted the Soviet Union model. With this rhetorical legerdemain, she extended the overstretched analogy of the "war on terrorism" as the equivalent of the cold war to Persia. Her lack of intellectual adeptness dismayed her interlocutors. One of the French told me Rice was "deaf to all argument", but no one engaged her gaffe because "good manners are back".
“Regardless of Rice's wordplay, it is not a policy. Rice has vaguely threatened to refer Iran to the UN security council. The "simply ridiculous" remains on the table at the same time as the US is unengaged in diplomacy. Bush doesn't know whether to join the Europeans in guaranteeing an agreement to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons or not.”
RUSSIAN COMMENTATORS: PUTIN WON ON POINTS
According to Russian media ,in his Brussels speech on February 21 Bush had thundered . "[F]or Russia to make progress as a European nation, the Russian government must renew a commitment to democracy and the rule of law,". "We recognize that reform will not happen overnight. We must always remind Russia, however, that our alliance stands for a free press, a vital opposition, the sharing of power, and the rule of law -- and the United States and all European countries should place democratic reform at the heart of their dialogue with Russia"
But in Bratislava Bush said in his opening remarks "It's very important that we establish not only a working relationship, but that we understand that in the 21st century strong countries are built by developing strong democracies," "And so we talked about democracy. Democracies always reflect a country's customs and culture, and I know that. But democracies have certain things in common: They have a rule of law and protection of minorities, a free press, and a viable political opposition.
“Russia has made tremendous progress over the last 15 years. It's an amazing transformation of the nation. And I applaud President Putin for dealing with a country that is in transformation. And it's been hard work. I was able to share my concerns about Russia's commitment in fulfilling these universal principles. I did so in a constructive and friendly way. I reaffirmed my belief that it is democracy and freedom that bring true security and prosperity in every land. We may not always agree with each other, and we haven't over the last four years -- that's for certain -- but we found a lot agreement, a lot of common ground, and the world is better for it"
Putin said that Russia would never return to the past -- something he has said before -- but added his now familiar caveat: that "the principles of democracy should be adequate to the current status of the development of Russia, to our history and our traditions." Bush indicated that he accepted this explanation, answering one reporter's question by saying: "I think the most important statement that you heard, and I heard, was the President's statement, when he declared his absolute support for democracy in Russia, and they're not turning back. To me, that is the most important statement of my private meeting, and it's the most important statement of this public press conference." Bush added: "And I can tell you what it's like dealing with the man over the last four years: When he tells you something, he means it."
Russian journalists at the press conference forced Bush on the back foot .Andrei Kolesnikov of Kommersant said that the American security services had assumed, " great powers" because of which the private lives of citizens are now being monitored by the state. This could be explained away by the consequences of September 11th, but this has nothing to do with democratic values." Bush replied lamely that USA was a "transparent country" where the government was accountable and must behave constitutionally.
Strangely , it was Putin who came to Bush's defense, and said : "I would like to support my American counterpart. I'm absolutely confident that democracy is not anarchy. It is not the possibility to do anything you want. It is not the possibility for anyone to rob your own people. Democracy is, among other things, and first and foremost, the possibility to democratically make democratic laws and the capability of the state to enforce those laws."
Then the Interfax correspondent Alexei Meshkov to embarrass Bush asked Putin why he does not raise the issue of "violations of the rights of journalists in the United States, about the fact that some journalists have been fired"
Many Russian commentators said that Putin got the better of Bush at the joint press conference. Arkadiy Dubnov wrote in Vremya Novostey, Russia, "If it was proper to ask who was the winner at the Bratislava summit ... I would venture to announce the Russian president ... Despite numerous statements by Mr Bush that he would confront Mr Putin on problems with democracy in Russia, the press heard nothing of the sort from the US president. Quite the opposite: Mr Bush radiated contentment and even pride at the assurances received from his 'friend Vladimir' that Russia continues to uphold the values of democracy and will not betray its choice, which it made 14 years ago.
Other commentators felt the same way ."The subject of the underdevelopment of Russian democracy was raised a huge number of times in the days preceding the summit," Ilya Baranov wrote for Gazeta.ru on February 24. "Many American and European politicians insistently advised the American president to draw attention to that subject during the course of his conversation with Putin. At the end of the day, the accents were maximally softened and what is more the Russian president returned the favor."
According to Interfax ,State Duma Foreign Affairs Committee Konstantin Kosachev said that the results of the summit "exceeded the most optimistic expectations." "discussions of the subject of democracy did not occupy the central place in the two presidents' talks, and George Bush's comment that the field of our disagreements is considerably narrower than the field of [our] coinciding interests can be considered crucial"
Conclusion;
A corporate US network anchor while discussing the role of on line media specially of the bloggers , queried about their accountability .the blogger said that apart from peer pressure and competition , if the bloggers were not objective and truthful , they will lose readers .It was more accountable than the so called mainstream media which was controlled by half a dozen corporations ; the sentence was quickly cut. This is a common practice on the western TV media .Also Western media always talks pompously of “the international community “, when mostly USA and its poodle UK support a certain policy , ignoring the governments representing many billions of Chinese, Indians , other Asians , Russians , Arabs and Africans .The audacity of distorted spin continues to amaze me .
It is quite clear that USA is not in a strong position , mired in the Iraqi swamp , with Nato and other allies not very keen to be involved any further in it. UN was emasculated by USA and has lost credibility and capability in Iraq .
USA is running a massive deficit at home and abroad and owes 1.5 trillion dollars to the world .US dollar is not going to go up soon .Its neo-cons and military industrial complex remain immune to correction and continue to pour billions in the so-called national missile defence project , which has been a screaming failure so far .In any case the missile defence system is irrelevant against the insurgency USA geminated and nurtured and now faces all around the world. New Russian missile tests have exposed the inadequacies of the missile defence
Russian coffers are overflowing with revenues from high oil prices which are not going to come down soon .Former republics in central Asia are lining up behind it . India and China are ready to invest tens of billions of dollars in Russian oil sector .China is accumulating dollars and enjoying others ‘having an interesting time ‘.
After the charade of globalization after the fall of the Berlin Wall , electorates are now voting for socialist governments ,as in Spain, Portugal , India and Latin America . After the election of a left of centre leader even in Uruguay , the leaders of Latin America , which USA has treated as its backyard are organizing resistance against unrestrained US hegemony and exploitation. People of these states have seen the failure of US style capitalism. Many in the Arab world are looking for a hedge against US unilateralism and the so-called drive for democracy in the Middle East , marketed by American media but believed by few , with USA’s abysmal record in promoting democracy .
The American regime is becoming more authoritative at home , media manipulative and catering for the rich . Instead of solving problems at home and with little prospects of coming out of Iraq honourably , US administration , like a trickster is diverting attention by calls for attack on Iran for its nuclear programme , from which it had to retreat after Russian signed and agreement to supply nuclear fuel after a used fuel return agreement .
US and EU had extended last year vociferous support by other means and in money and succeeded in foisting a pro-West president on Ukraine, historically and strategically close to Russia , with a large Russian speaking minority. Russian naval forces berth at Ukrainian ports and loss of Ukraine would constrict Russian access to the Black like that of Iraq to the Gulf. It is like Mexico going the way of Cuba.
Now there is organized spontaneity and cacophony of the opposition in Lebanon after a massive bomb blast on 14 February in Beirut that killed the former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri . Israel and US have accused Syria , even of recent suicide bomb blast in Tel Aviv . First Israel and then USA said that they have proof .After weapons of mass destruction and other false claims and lies, US credibility lies shattered.
The whole dangerous game resembles recent franchised revolutions , in Georgia and Ukraine . Druzes , whose leader Walid Jumbalat is shown regularly on Western channels are 7% of population , the media has not bothered to interview leaders of Shiite community, organized in Ammal and Hizbullah political groups and militias .The Shiite form over 50% of population , but for western media , the peoples power in the street is now important . It was ignored when a million marched through the streets of London before the invasion of Iraq .
The Syrian forces came to Lebanon in 1976 and are there under Taif agreement , as neither Arabs nor the West could agree on any hing else . UN 1559 Resolution , passed last year at the behest of USA and France , a former colonial power which divided Syria to create Lebanon and gave power to Christians ,apart from with drawl of Syrian forces , also demands disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias including Hezbollah ,which had ousted Israeli forces from southern Lebanon .But US and France led measures have resulted in a call for the with drawl of Syrian forces .It could lead to a catastrophe in Lebanon. Just look at what happened when Iraqi armed forces were disbanded by USA in Iraq . Lebanon has a large Christian minority , which is now leading the opposition . It is being egged on from safety by even larger Lebanese Christian community living abroad .But whenever the Western Christians have come to the East , Eastern Christians have suffered though out history. It was an attack by Western Crusaders on Constantinople , which undermined the foundations of the Byzantine empire which soon led to its decline , defeat and take over by the Turks from central Asia.
K Gajendra Singh, Indian ambassador (retired), served as ambassador to Turkey from August 1992 to April 1996 . Prior to that, he served terms as ambassador to Jordan, Romania and Senegal. He is currently chairman of the Foundation for Indo-Turkic Studies and editorial adviser with global geopolitics website Eurasia Research Center, USA. E-mail: Gajendrak@hotmail.com.
This article was also published at Saag.org.
Saturday, March 05, 2005
How US Media feeds the Violence in Palestine
By Mike Whitney
Al-Jazeerah, March 4, 2005
Every newspaper in the nation (US) ran the same basic headline: “Four Dead in Israeli Blast” or “Terror Kills Four in Tel Aviv”.
The same held true for the major (US) TV News networks: “Four Israelis were killed today and fifty more were injured by a suicide bomber at a Tel Aviv discotheque”…etc
In many newspapers the story ran on the front page for a second straight day, this time featuring the spurious, unsupported claims of Israeli officials manipulating the tragedy to advance their own foreign policy ambitions. (This time the imagined enemy was Syria; next time it’ll be Iran.) Even the death of their own countryman is nothing more than a springboard to advance their strategies for regional gain. In America, we can sympathize with this type of behavior; the Bush administration is invariably motivated by the same cynical objectives.
Never the less, the gratuitous murder of 4 Israelis appeared exactly where it should, slapped up on the front page of every newspaper in the country. If only that standard of justice was demonstrated evenhandedly it would have some real meaning and affect a positive change for an increasingly tragic situation. Instead, the coverage, entirely slanted in its selective treatment of victims, becomes another propellant that keeps the fires of Middle East rage burning. The (US) media has become a major player in the Israeli-Palestinian disaster; a cheerleader who distorts the news according to its own political predisposition and fuels the conflict by keeping compromise and common sense well beyond the reach of the warring parties.
The media is the greatest facilitator of violence in the world today. It picks the “good guys” and the “bad guys” and creates the logic of victim-hood and reprisal. Its solitary function is to promote the sordid agenda of its corporate paymasters who regard violence as the most cost effective way of achieving their self-aggrandizing aims.When a Palestinian schoolgirl was brutally shot in the head some weeks ago, the story was omitted from the front page of every newspaper in the country (US).
Are Jewish children more valuable?
The Israeli officer, who shot her, proceeded to unload his entire clip at close range into her head; a flagrant and unforgivable act of sadism. If this isn’t terrorism, then terrorism has no meaning.
The story was begrudgingly consigned to America’s back pages. That’s where the reluctant press sticks the stories about the people who don’t count; whose lives are only reported for purposes of credibility, but are quickly dispatched to the ash heap where their tale won’t threaten the accepted narrative.
Nine Palestinians have been killed by the IDF since Sharon and his Palestinian counterpart, Abbas, agreed to a complete cessation of violence.Nine!
Not one of them was covered on the front page of an American newspaper. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said, “An end to the violence cannot be sustained when Palestinians are being killed by the Israeli Army on a daily basis.”
But, Abbas is wrong, because violence against Palestinians doesn’t count.
What possible difference could it make if Israel kills 9 Palestinians or 900? To the world at large Palestinians are the invisible people. They don’t exist. Their only reality is as an obstacle to the territorial aspirations of the people who DO COUNT; the people who can expect to see their children on the front page of the newspaper if they are blown up in some senseless act of revenge.
This is the world that the media has created; a virtual world where justice exists only for the few who have their own bullhorn to shout their story from the front page of America’s newspapers. No one else really matters. Their miserable lives can be snuffed out by an IDF bullet in Gaza or by a 500 lb. bomb in Falluja; it’s all the same. “We don’t do body counts” in Iraq, and the media won’t do them in Palestine. When deaths go unrecorded in the media, then the victims cease to be, and the violence is perpetuated.
The real cycle of violence originates with the media and the forces behind it. It’s within their power to show the checkpoints, the Wall, the jails, the brutality, the malnutrition, the unemployment, the assassinations and the all-encompassing occupation. They choose not to do so. Instead, their cameras focus entirely on the random acts of violence that feed the rationale for retaliation, subjugation and injustice.
The media’s bloody fingerprints are all over tragedy in the Middle East. The skewed coverage ensures that the violence will continue well into the future.
Al-Jazeerah, March 4, 2005
Every newspaper in the nation (US) ran the same basic headline: “Four Dead in Israeli Blast” or “Terror Kills Four in Tel Aviv”.
The same held true for the major (US) TV News networks: “Four Israelis were killed today and fifty more were injured by a suicide bomber at a Tel Aviv discotheque”…etc
In many newspapers the story ran on the front page for a second straight day, this time featuring the spurious, unsupported claims of Israeli officials manipulating the tragedy to advance their own foreign policy ambitions. (This time the imagined enemy was Syria; next time it’ll be Iran.) Even the death of their own countryman is nothing more than a springboard to advance their strategies for regional gain. In America, we can sympathize with this type of behavior; the Bush administration is invariably motivated by the same cynical objectives.
Never the less, the gratuitous murder of 4 Israelis appeared exactly where it should, slapped up on the front page of every newspaper in the country. If only that standard of justice was demonstrated evenhandedly it would have some real meaning and affect a positive change for an increasingly tragic situation. Instead, the coverage, entirely slanted in its selective treatment of victims, becomes another propellant that keeps the fires of Middle East rage burning. The (US) media has become a major player in the Israeli-Palestinian disaster; a cheerleader who distorts the news according to its own political predisposition and fuels the conflict by keeping compromise and common sense well beyond the reach of the warring parties.
The media is the greatest facilitator of violence in the world today. It picks the “good guys” and the “bad guys” and creates the logic of victim-hood and reprisal. Its solitary function is to promote the sordid agenda of its corporate paymasters who regard violence as the most cost effective way of achieving their self-aggrandizing aims.When a Palestinian schoolgirl was brutally shot in the head some weeks ago, the story was omitted from the front page of every newspaper in the country (US).
Are Jewish children more valuable?
The Israeli officer, who shot her, proceeded to unload his entire clip at close range into her head; a flagrant and unforgivable act of sadism. If this isn’t terrorism, then terrorism has no meaning.
The story was begrudgingly consigned to America’s back pages. That’s where the reluctant press sticks the stories about the people who don’t count; whose lives are only reported for purposes of credibility, but are quickly dispatched to the ash heap where their tale won’t threaten the accepted narrative.
Nine Palestinians have been killed by the IDF since Sharon and his Palestinian counterpart, Abbas, agreed to a complete cessation of violence.Nine!
Not one of them was covered on the front page of an American newspaper. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said, “An end to the violence cannot be sustained when Palestinians are being killed by the Israeli Army on a daily basis.”
But, Abbas is wrong, because violence against Palestinians doesn’t count.
What possible difference could it make if Israel kills 9 Palestinians or 900? To the world at large Palestinians are the invisible people. They don’t exist. Their only reality is as an obstacle to the territorial aspirations of the people who DO COUNT; the people who can expect to see their children on the front page of the newspaper if they are blown up in some senseless act of revenge.
This is the world that the media has created; a virtual world where justice exists only for the few who have their own bullhorn to shout their story from the front page of America’s newspapers. No one else really matters. Their miserable lives can be snuffed out by an IDF bullet in Gaza or by a 500 lb. bomb in Falluja; it’s all the same. “We don’t do body counts” in Iraq, and the media won’t do them in Palestine. When deaths go unrecorded in the media, then the victims cease to be, and the violence is perpetuated.
The real cycle of violence originates with the media and the forces behind it. It’s within their power to show the checkpoints, the Wall, the jails, the brutality, the malnutrition, the unemployment, the assassinations and the all-encompassing occupation. They choose not to do so. Instead, their cameras focus entirely on the random acts of violence that feed the rationale for retaliation, subjugation and injustice.
The media’s bloody fingerprints are all over tragedy in the Middle East. The skewed coverage ensures that the violence will continue well into the future.
This is About Israel , Not Anti-Semitism
By Ken Livingstone
Al-Jazeerah, March 5, 2005
Guardian, March 4, 2005
Not to speak out against this injustice would not only be wrong. It would ignore the threat it poses to us all
Racism is a uniquely reactionary ideology, used to justify the greatest crimes in history - the slave trade, the extermination of all original inhabitants of the Caribbean, the elimination of every native inhabitant of Tasmania, apartheid. The Holocaust was the ultimate, "industrialised" expression of racist barbarity. Racism serves as the cutting edge of the most reactionary movements. An ideology that starts by declaring one human being inferior to another is the slope whose end is at Auschwitz. That is why I detest racism.
No serious commentator has argued that my comments to an Evening Standard reporter outside City Hall last month were anti-semitic. So I am glad that Henry Grunwald, president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, accepted on these pages that "Ken is sincere when he states that he regards the Holocaust as the worst crime of the last century".
The contribution of Jewish people to human civilisation and culture is unexcelled and extraordinary. You only have to think of giants such as Einstein, Freud and Marx to realise that human civilisation would be unrecognisably diminished without the achievements of the Jewish people. The same goes for the Jewish contribution to London today.
As mayor, I have pressed for police action over anti-semitic attacks at the highest level, and my administration has backed a series of initiatives of importance to the Jewish community, including hosting the Anne Frank exhibition at City Hall and measures to ensure the go-ahead for the north London eruv.
Throughout the 1970s, I worked happily with the Board of Deputies in campaigns against the National Front. Problems began when, as leader of the Greater London Council, I rejected the board's request that I should fund only Jewish organisations that it approved of. The Board of Deputies was unhappy that I funded Jewish organisations campaigning for gay rights and others that disagreed with policies of the Israeli governmen.
Relations with the board took a dramatic turn for the worse when I opposed Israel's illegal invasion of Lebanon, culminating in the massacres at the Palestinian camps of Sabra and Shatila. The board also opposed my involvement in the successful campaign in 1982 to convince the Labour party to recognise the PLO as the legitimate voice of the Palestinian people.
The fundamental issue on which we differ, as Henry Grunwald knows, is not anti-semitism - which my administration has fought tooth and nail - but the policies of successive Israeli governments.
To avoid manufactured misunderstandings, the policies of Israeli governments are not analogous to Nazism. They do not aim at the systematic extermination of the Palestinian people, in the way Nazism sought the annihilation of the Jews.
Israel's expansion has included ethnic cleansing. Palestinians who had lived in that land for centuries were driven out by systematic violence and terror aimed at ethnically cleansing what became a large part of the Israeli state. The methods of groups like the Irgun and the Stern gang were the same as those of the Bosnian Serb leader Karadzic: to drive out people by terror.
Today the Israeli government continues seizures of Palestinian land for settlements, military incursions into surrounding countries and denial of the right of Palestinians expelled by terror to return. Ariel Sharon, Israel's prime minister, is a war criminal who should be in prison, not in office. Israel's own Kahan commission found that Sharon shared responsibility for the Sabra and Shatila massacres.
Sharon continues to organise terror. More than three times as many Palestinians as Israelis have been killed in the present conflict. There are more than 7,000 Palestinians in Israel's jails.
To obscure these truths, those around Israel's present government have resorted to demonisation. Initial targets were Palestinians, and have now become Muslims. Take the Middle East Media Research Institute, run by a former colonel in Israeli military intelligence, which poses as a source of objective information but in reality selectively translates material from Arabic and presents Muslims and Arabs in the worst possible light.
Today the Israeli government is helping to promote a wholly distorted picture of racism and religious discrimination in Europe, implying that the most serious upsurge of hatred and discrimination is against Jews.
All racist and anti-semitic attacks must be stamped out. However, the reality is that the great bulk of racist attacks in Europe today are on black people, Asians and Muslims - and they are the primary targets of the extreme right. For 20 years Israeli governments have attempted to portray anyone who forcefully criticises the policies of Israel as anti-semitic. The truth is the opposite: the same universal human values that recognise the Holocaust as the greatest racist crime of the 20th century require condemnation of the policies of successive Israeli governments - not on the absurd grounds that they are Nazi or equivalent to the Holocaust, but because ethnic cleansing, discrimination and terror are immoral.
They are also fuelling anger and violence across the world. For a mayor of London not to speak out against such injustice would not only be wrong - but would also ignore the threat it poses to the security of all Londoners.
· Ken Livingstone is the London mayor
Al-Jazeerah, March 5, 2005
Guardian, March 4, 2005
Not to speak out against this injustice would not only be wrong. It would ignore the threat it poses to us all
Racism is a uniquely reactionary ideology, used to justify the greatest crimes in history - the slave trade, the extermination of all original inhabitants of the Caribbean, the elimination of every native inhabitant of Tasmania, apartheid. The Holocaust was the ultimate, "industrialised" expression of racist barbarity. Racism serves as the cutting edge of the most reactionary movements. An ideology that starts by declaring one human being inferior to another is the slope whose end is at Auschwitz. That is why I detest racism.
No serious commentator has argued that my comments to an Evening Standard reporter outside City Hall last month were anti-semitic. So I am glad that Henry Grunwald, president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, accepted on these pages that "Ken is sincere when he states that he regards the Holocaust as the worst crime of the last century".
The contribution of Jewish people to human civilisation and culture is unexcelled and extraordinary. You only have to think of giants such as Einstein, Freud and Marx to realise that human civilisation would be unrecognisably diminished without the achievements of the Jewish people. The same goes for the Jewish contribution to London today.
As mayor, I have pressed for police action over anti-semitic attacks at the highest level, and my administration has backed a series of initiatives of importance to the Jewish community, including hosting the Anne Frank exhibition at City Hall and measures to ensure the go-ahead for the north London eruv.
Throughout the 1970s, I worked happily with the Board of Deputies in campaigns against the National Front. Problems began when, as leader of the Greater London Council, I rejected the board's request that I should fund only Jewish organisations that it approved of. The Board of Deputies was unhappy that I funded Jewish organisations campaigning for gay rights and others that disagreed with policies of the Israeli governmen.
Relations with the board took a dramatic turn for the worse when I opposed Israel's illegal invasion of Lebanon, culminating in the massacres at the Palestinian camps of Sabra and Shatila. The board also opposed my involvement in the successful campaign in 1982 to convince the Labour party to recognise the PLO as the legitimate voice of the Palestinian people.
The fundamental issue on which we differ, as Henry Grunwald knows, is not anti-semitism - which my administration has fought tooth and nail - but the policies of successive Israeli governments.
To avoid manufactured misunderstandings, the policies of Israeli governments are not analogous to Nazism. They do not aim at the systematic extermination of the Palestinian people, in the way Nazism sought the annihilation of the Jews.
Israel's expansion has included ethnic cleansing. Palestinians who had lived in that land for centuries were driven out by systematic violence and terror aimed at ethnically cleansing what became a large part of the Israeli state. The methods of groups like the Irgun and the Stern gang were the same as those of the Bosnian Serb leader Karadzic: to drive out people by terror.
Today the Israeli government continues seizures of Palestinian land for settlements, military incursions into surrounding countries and denial of the right of Palestinians expelled by terror to return. Ariel Sharon, Israel's prime minister, is a war criminal who should be in prison, not in office. Israel's own Kahan commission found that Sharon shared responsibility for the Sabra and Shatila massacres.
Sharon continues to organise terror. More than three times as many Palestinians as Israelis have been killed in the present conflict. There are more than 7,000 Palestinians in Israel's jails.
To obscure these truths, those around Israel's present government have resorted to demonisation. Initial targets were Palestinians, and have now become Muslims. Take the Middle East Media Research Institute, run by a former colonel in Israeli military intelligence, which poses as a source of objective information but in reality selectively translates material from Arabic and presents Muslims and Arabs in the worst possible light.
Today the Israeli government is helping to promote a wholly distorted picture of racism and religious discrimination in Europe, implying that the most serious upsurge of hatred and discrimination is against Jews.
All racist and anti-semitic attacks must be stamped out. However, the reality is that the great bulk of racist attacks in Europe today are on black people, Asians and Muslims - and they are the primary targets of the extreme right. For 20 years Israeli governments have attempted to portray anyone who forcefully criticises the policies of Israel as anti-semitic. The truth is the opposite: the same universal human values that recognise the Holocaust as the greatest racist crime of the 20th century require condemnation of the policies of successive Israeli governments - not on the absurd grounds that they are Nazi or equivalent to the Holocaust, but because ethnic cleansing, discrimination and terror are immoral.
They are also fuelling anger and violence across the world. For a mayor of London not to speak out against such injustice would not only be wrong - but would also ignore the threat it poses to the security of all Londoners.
· Ken Livingstone is the London mayor
Wednesday, March 02, 2005
NE Christians demand dissolution of NMC
GUWAHATI, March 1 – The Christian community of North East today urged the Centre to reconstitute the National Minority Commission (NMC) by disolving the present one as it had allegedly lost its credibility as the guardian of the minority community and its interests. A group of eight Christian associations of the North East in a statement said Commission Chairman Tarlochan Singh's comment at a recent seminar in Kochi that there was an abnormally high increase in the Christian population in the region was “highly motivated”.
“The Christian community of North East demands an apology from the Commission for its controversial and highly provocative statement in the Kochi seminar and subsequent statement made by Chairman to the media,” they said. “The Christian community feel that the Commission's observations were biased and not intended to objectively study the census data. We suspect the actual intention of the Commission was to sensationalise the whole issue by citing data from selected pockets,” the statement said.
They also expressed concern that the indigenous and tribal people of North East are facing the onslaught of “unchecked influx of people of the dominant community from outside the region which is evident from the changing population pattern in the region.” The statement was signed by representatives of Dispur Baptist Church, Nepali Baptist Church, Catholic Women's Association, All Bodo Christian Coordination Committee, Mar Baptist, Garo Baptist and Catholic Churches. — PTI
“The Christian community of North East demands an apology from the Commission for its controversial and highly provocative statement in the Kochi seminar and subsequent statement made by Chairman to the media,” they said. “The Christian community feel that the Commission's observations were biased and not intended to objectively study the census data. We suspect the actual intention of the Commission was to sensationalise the whole issue by citing data from selected pockets,” the statement said.
They also expressed concern that the indigenous and tribal people of North East are facing the onslaught of “unchecked influx of people of the dominant community from outside the region which is evident from the changing population pattern in the region.” The statement was signed by representatives of Dispur Baptist Church, Nepali Baptist Church, Catholic Women's Association, All Bodo Christian Coordination Committee, Mar Baptist, Garo Baptist and Catholic Churches. — PTI
K R Narayanan raps Vajapyee for Gujarat riots
Wednesday, 02 March , 2005, 14:10
Thiruvananthapuram: Two years after stepping down from office, former president K R Narayanan has severely criticised former prime minister A B Vajpayee for the way he handled the post-Godhra situation.
"He (Vajapyee) did not do anything effective. I had sent him letters. I had talked to him directly. Had military been given powers to shoot, the carnage in Gujarat could have been avoided to a great extent," Narayanan said in a free-wheeling interview to Congress MLA P T Thomas carried by a recent issue of Malayalam magazine 'Manava Samskriti'.
Holding that there was a conspiracy involving the state and Central governments behind the 2002 Gujarat riots, he said if the military was given powers to shoot at the perpetrators of violence, the Gujarat riots could have been avoided.
"I had asked military to be sent to suppress the riots. The Centre had the constitutional responsibility and powers to send military if the state governments asked. The military was sent."
"But if the military was given powers to shoot at the perpetrators of violence, recurrence of tragedies in Gujarat could have been avoided. However, both the state and Central government did not do so," Narayanan said.
Thiruvananthapuram: Two years after stepping down from office, former president K R Narayanan has severely criticised former prime minister A B Vajpayee for the way he handled the post-Godhra situation.
"He (Vajapyee) did not do anything effective. I had sent him letters. I had talked to him directly. Had military been given powers to shoot, the carnage in Gujarat could have been avoided to a great extent," Narayanan said in a free-wheeling interview to Congress MLA P T Thomas carried by a recent issue of Malayalam magazine 'Manava Samskriti'.
Holding that there was a conspiracy involving the state and Central governments behind the 2002 Gujarat riots, he said if the military was given powers to shoot at the perpetrators of violence, the Gujarat riots could have been avoided.
"I had asked military to be sent to suppress the riots. The Centre had the constitutional responsibility and powers to send military if the state governments asked. The military was sent."
"But if the military was given powers to shoot at the perpetrators of violence, recurrence of tragedies in Gujarat could have been avoided. However, both the state and Central government did not do so," Narayanan said.
Tibet: Dalai Lama and the Muslims
http://www.unpo.org/news_detail.php?arg=52&par=2006
Tibet had pockets of Muslims entrenched within its
borders, although there is no documentary evidence on
how they first came to settle there. In fact,
information on Tibetan Muslims is scarce. But the
existence of Tibet appears to be known to the Muslim
world from the earliest period of recorded history.
Arab historians like Yaqut Hamawi, Ibn Khaldun and
Tabari mention Tibet in their writings. In fact, Yaqut
Hamawihas, in his book Muajumal Buldan (Encyclopaedia
of Countries), refers to Tibet in three different
ways: Tabbat, Tibet and Tubbet.
Kashmir and Eastern Turkestan are the nearest Islamic
regions bordering Tibet. It is said that Muslim
migrants from Kashmir and Ladakh first entered Tibet
around 12th century. Gradually, marriage and social
interaction led to an increase in the population until
a sizable community came up around Lhasa, Tibet's
capital.
Muslims are known to the Tibetans as "Khache". This is
perhaps because the earliest Muslim settlers had come
from Kashmir which was known as "Khache Yul" in old
Tibetan texts.
The arrival of Muslims was followed by the
construction of mosques in different parts of Tibet.
There were four mosques in Lhasa, two in Shigatse and
one in Tsethang. Tibetan Muslims were mainly
concentrated around the mosques, which also served as
the centres of Muslim social life in Tibet.
It was actually the Fifth Dalai Lama (1617-1682), who
played a seminal role in helping to pave the way for
the flourishing of Muslim community in Tibet's
Buddhist environment. He issued a decree, granting
Tibetan Muslims special privileges, which they enjoyed
until the Chinese occupation of Tibet in 1959. In
accordance with this dercee:
The Muslims were permitted to handle their affairs
independently, according to the Shariat Law. The
Muslim community was permitted to elect a five-man
committee, known as "Ponj", to look after their
interests.
They were free to set up commercial enterprises and
were exempted from taxation.
They were also exempted from the "no-meat rule",
enforced on the Buddhist populace during the holy
Buddhist month.
They were also exempted from removing their hats in
deference to Buddhist priests during a period in a
year when the priests held sway over the town.
In addition, Muslims were given their own burial
place. There were two cemeteries around Lhasa: one at
Gyanda Linka, about 12 km from Lhasa town, and the
other at Kygasha, about 15 km away. A portion of
Gyanda Linka was turned into a garden and this became
the place where the Muslim community organised their
major public events. Gyanda Linka is said to contain
unmarked graves believed to be those of foreigners who
came to preach Islam to Tibet.
As the community grew, Madrasas (primary schools) were
set up to teach Islam, the Koran and the namaz
(prayers). Urdu language was also part of the
curriculum. There were two such Madrasas in Lhasa and
one in Shigatse.
After finishing their studies in these Madrasas,
students were sent to India to join Islamic institutes
of higher learning such as Darul-Uloom in Deoband,
Nadwatul-Ulema in Lucknow and Jamia Millia Islamia in
New Delhi. The annual report of Darul-Uloom for the
year 1875 mention the presence of two foreign students
there: a Burmese and a Tibetan. Jamia Millia Islamia
received its first batch of Tibetan students in 1945.
In those days, transportation within Tibet was
undeveloped. Students were sent along with Muslim
merchants making their annuals trip to India. This
took months as they had to walk or ride horses or yaks
for most of the way. Therefore, once the students got
admitted to an institution in India, they usually did
not return home until the completion of a stage of
their education.
Quite a few Tibetan Muslims successfully completed
their studies in India, achieving proficiency in
Arabic, Urdu and Persian. The most famous among them
was Faidhullah, who undertook the ambitious task of
translating into Tibetan Gulestan and Boastan, Persian
poetry of Sheik Sadi. Faidhullah is well known among
Tibetans for his popular book of aphorisms, Khache
Phalu (A Few Words of Advice From a Muslim).
Even today, Tibetans quote from his book in support of
a point of view in secular debates. An English
translation of Khache Phaluh has been done by Dr. Dawa
Norbu and published by the Library of Tibetan Works &
Archives.
Tibetan Muslims have also made significant
contribution to Tibetan culture, particularly in the
field of music. Nangma, a popular classical music of
Tibet, is said to have been brought to Tibet by
Tibetan Muslims. In fact, the very term Nangma is
believed to be a corruption of the Urdu word Naghma,
meaning song. These high-pitched lilting songs,
developed in Tibet around the turn of the Century,
were a craze in Lhasa with musical hits by Acha Izzat,
Bhai Akbar-la and Oulam Mehdi on the lips of almost
everyone.
After the failed Tibetan National Uprising of 1959 His
Holiness the Dalai Lama went into-exile in India,
followed by a significant number of Tibetans.
However, the majority of Tibetan Muslims, particularly
those residing in Lhasa, were able to leave only a
year later. In between they, like their Buddhist
compatriots, had to suffer extortion, repression and
other acts of cruelty at the hands of Chinese
occupation forces.
During this critical period, Tibetan Muslims organised
themselves and approached the Indian mission in Lhasa
to reclaim Indian citizenship, citing their Kashmiri
ancestry. At that time, the head of the Tibetan Muslim
community, Haji Habibullah Shamo, was under Chinese
detention along with other Muslim leaders like Bhai
Addul Gani-la;.Rapse Hamidullah, Abdual Ahad Hajj,
Abdul Qadir Jami and HajiAbdul Gani Thapsha. While
Bhai Abdul Gani-la was charged with putting up
anti-Chinese wall posters, Rapse Hamidullah was
arrested on account of his connection with a senior
Tibetan official.
The initial response of the Indian Government to the
Muslim request was lukewarm. It said only those who
had permanent domicile status in the Indian state of
Jammu and Kashmir and those who visited India from
time to time, and those whose parents or one of the
grandparents were born in India, would be considered
potential citizens of India.
But some time later, in late 1959, the Indian
Government suddenly came out with the statement that
all Tibetan Muslims were Indian nationals and entitled
to citizenship.
Meanwhile, the Chinese authorities duped the Muslims
into selling their property to the government in
return for permission to emigrate to any Muslim
country. Seeing this as a possible way of saving their
religion and culture, many Tibetan Muslims willingly
parted with their property. But the authorities
reneged on their promise and instead orchestrated a
campaign of social boycott against them. Nobody was
allowed to sell food to Tibetan Muslims. Many old and
weak Tibetan Muslims as well as children died of
starvation.
Such Tibetan Muslims as were able to cross over to the
Indian border towns of Kalimpong, Darjeeling and
Gangtok gradually moved to Kashmir, their ancestral
homeland, from 1961 to 1964. The Indian Government
sheltered them in three huge buildings in Idd-Gah in
the Kashmiri capital city of Srinagar. His Holiness
the Dalai Lama sent his Representative to Idd-Gah look
into their conditions.
During the first two decades of their life in exile,
Tibetan Muslims attempted to rebuild and re-organise
themselves. Lack of proper guidance and community
leadership proved to be an obstacle in their
development. Also, housing in Idd-Gah was inadequate
to meet the requirements of a growing family. In the
process, Tibetan Muslims began to scatter, emigrating
to Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Nepal. Some moved to
other parts of India in search of better livelihood
opportunity.
His Holiness the Dalai Lama continued to keep himself
informed of conditions of Tibetan Muslims in Idd-Gah.
In 1975 he visited Srinagar and raised their problems
with the Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir.
Following a request from him, the Chief Minister
provided the Tibetan Muslims with land for their
resettlement.
His Holiness also encouraged the formation of a
Tibetan Muslim Refugee Welfare Association. This
Association began to chalk out projects for the
economic and educational upliftment of the community.
With the seed money from His Holiness, followed by
assistance from Tibet Fund in New York, a handicraft
centre, a co-operative shop and a school were
established. A group of young Tibetan Muslims were
invited to Dharamsala to learn the trade of
carpet-weaving and marketing.
The Department of Health in Dharamsala has set up a
primary health care centre to look after the medical
needs of the Muslims.
Saudi Arabia provided funds for the construction of
144 houses and a mosque in the new settlement.
Construction was completed in 1985 and the houses
distributed among the people. Not all people could be
accommodated and some continued to reside in the old
settlement.
There is now a Tibetan Muslim Youth Association which
plays an important role in the social upliftment of
the community, and maintains contact with the
mainstream Tibetan Youth Congress.
Nothing much is known of the present condition of
Tibetan Muslims inside Tibet. According to one report
there are around 3000 Tibetan Muslims there.
The total population of Tibetan Muslims outside Tibet
is around 2000. Of them, 20 to 25 families live in
Nepal, 20 in the Gulf countries and Turkey. Fifty
families reside in Darjeeling-Kalimpong areas
bordering Tibet in eastern India.
They continue to look up to their Muslim brethren
throughout the world for support to the cause of Tibet
so that they can one day return to their homeland and
enjoy the life of dignity that they once enjoyed. A
young Tibetan Muslim in exile, when asked whether he
would return to Tibet in the event of a solution,
responded, "It is better to live under a bridge in
one's own homeland than to live as a refugee in an
alien land."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tibet had pockets of Muslims entrenched within its
borders, although there is no documentary evidence on
how they first came to settle there. In fact,
information on Tibetan Muslims is scarce. But the
existence of Tibet appears to be known to the Muslim
world from the earliest period of recorded history.
Arab historians like Yaqut Hamawi, Ibn Khaldun and
Tabari mention Tibet in their writings. In fact, Yaqut
Hamawihas, in his book Muajumal Buldan (Encyclopaedia
of Countries), refers to Tibet in three different
ways: Tabbat, Tibet and Tubbet.
Kashmir and Eastern Turkestan are the nearest Islamic
regions bordering Tibet. It is said that Muslim
migrants from Kashmir and Ladakh first entered Tibet
around 12th century. Gradually, marriage and social
interaction led to an increase in the population until
a sizable community came up around Lhasa, Tibet's
capital.
Muslims are known to the Tibetans as "Khache". This is
perhaps because the earliest Muslim settlers had come
from Kashmir which was known as "Khache Yul" in old
Tibetan texts.
The arrival of Muslims was followed by the
construction of mosques in different parts of Tibet.
There were four mosques in Lhasa, two in Shigatse and
one in Tsethang. Tibetan Muslims were mainly
concentrated around the mosques, which also served as
the centres of Muslim social life in Tibet.
It was actually the Fifth Dalai Lama (1617-1682), who
played a seminal role in helping to pave the way for
the flourishing of Muslim community in Tibet's
Buddhist environment. He issued a decree, granting
Tibetan Muslims special privileges, which they enjoyed
until the Chinese occupation of Tibet in 1959. In
accordance with this dercee:
The Muslims were permitted to handle their affairs
independently, according to the Shariat Law. The
Muslim community was permitted to elect a five-man
committee, known as "Ponj", to look after their
interests.
They were free to set up commercial enterprises and
were exempted from taxation.
They were also exempted from the "no-meat rule",
enforced on the Buddhist populace during the holy
Buddhist month.
They were also exempted from removing their hats in
deference to Buddhist priests during a period in a
year when the priests held sway over the town.
In addition, Muslims were given their own burial
place. There were two cemeteries around Lhasa: one at
Gyanda Linka, about 12 km from Lhasa town, and the
other at Kygasha, about 15 km away. A portion of
Gyanda Linka was turned into a garden and this became
the place where the Muslim community organised their
major public events. Gyanda Linka is said to contain
unmarked graves believed to be those of foreigners who
came to preach Islam to Tibet.
As the community grew, Madrasas (primary schools) were
set up to teach Islam, the Koran and the namaz
(prayers). Urdu language was also part of the
curriculum. There were two such Madrasas in Lhasa and
one in Shigatse.
After finishing their studies in these Madrasas,
students were sent to India to join Islamic institutes
of higher learning such as Darul-Uloom in Deoband,
Nadwatul-Ulema in Lucknow and Jamia Millia Islamia in
New Delhi. The annual report of Darul-Uloom for the
year 1875 mention the presence of two foreign students
there: a Burmese and a Tibetan. Jamia Millia Islamia
received its first batch of Tibetan students in 1945.
In those days, transportation within Tibet was
undeveloped. Students were sent along with Muslim
merchants making their annuals trip to India. This
took months as they had to walk or ride horses or yaks
for most of the way. Therefore, once the students got
admitted to an institution in India, they usually did
not return home until the completion of a stage of
their education.
Quite a few Tibetan Muslims successfully completed
their studies in India, achieving proficiency in
Arabic, Urdu and Persian. The most famous among them
was Faidhullah, who undertook the ambitious task of
translating into Tibetan Gulestan and Boastan, Persian
poetry of Sheik Sadi. Faidhullah is well known among
Tibetans for his popular book of aphorisms, Khache
Phalu (A Few Words of Advice From a Muslim).
Even today, Tibetans quote from his book in support of
a point of view in secular debates. An English
translation of Khache Phaluh has been done by Dr. Dawa
Norbu and published by the Library of Tibetan Works &
Archives.
Tibetan Muslims have also made significant
contribution to Tibetan culture, particularly in the
field of music. Nangma, a popular classical music of
Tibet, is said to have been brought to Tibet by
Tibetan Muslims. In fact, the very term Nangma is
believed to be a corruption of the Urdu word Naghma,
meaning song. These high-pitched lilting songs,
developed in Tibet around the turn of the Century,
were a craze in Lhasa with musical hits by Acha Izzat,
Bhai Akbar-la and Oulam Mehdi on the lips of almost
everyone.
After the failed Tibetan National Uprising of 1959 His
Holiness the Dalai Lama went into-exile in India,
followed by a significant number of Tibetans.
However, the majority of Tibetan Muslims, particularly
those residing in Lhasa, were able to leave only a
year later. In between they, like their Buddhist
compatriots, had to suffer extortion, repression and
other acts of cruelty at the hands of Chinese
occupation forces.
During this critical period, Tibetan Muslims organised
themselves and approached the Indian mission in Lhasa
to reclaim Indian citizenship, citing their Kashmiri
ancestry. At that time, the head of the Tibetan Muslim
community, Haji Habibullah Shamo, was under Chinese
detention along with other Muslim leaders like Bhai
Addul Gani-la;.Rapse Hamidullah, Abdual Ahad Hajj,
Abdul Qadir Jami and HajiAbdul Gani Thapsha. While
Bhai Abdul Gani-la was charged with putting up
anti-Chinese wall posters, Rapse Hamidullah was
arrested on account of his connection with a senior
Tibetan official.
The initial response of the Indian Government to the
Muslim request was lukewarm. It said only those who
had permanent domicile status in the Indian state of
Jammu and Kashmir and those who visited India from
time to time, and those whose parents or one of the
grandparents were born in India, would be considered
potential citizens of India.
But some time later, in late 1959, the Indian
Government suddenly came out with the statement that
all Tibetan Muslims were Indian nationals and entitled
to citizenship.
Meanwhile, the Chinese authorities duped the Muslims
into selling their property to the government in
return for permission to emigrate to any Muslim
country. Seeing this as a possible way of saving their
religion and culture, many Tibetan Muslims willingly
parted with their property. But the authorities
reneged on their promise and instead orchestrated a
campaign of social boycott against them. Nobody was
allowed to sell food to Tibetan Muslims. Many old and
weak Tibetan Muslims as well as children died of
starvation.
Such Tibetan Muslims as were able to cross over to the
Indian border towns of Kalimpong, Darjeeling and
Gangtok gradually moved to Kashmir, their ancestral
homeland, from 1961 to 1964. The Indian Government
sheltered them in three huge buildings in Idd-Gah in
the Kashmiri capital city of Srinagar. His Holiness
the Dalai Lama sent his Representative to Idd-Gah look
into their conditions.
During the first two decades of their life in exile,
Tibetan Muslims attempted to rebuild and re-organise
themselves. Lack of proper guidance and community
leadership proved to be an obstacle in their
development. Also, housing in Idd-Gah was inadequate
to meet the requirements of a growing family. In the
process, Tibetan Muslims began to scatter, emigrating
to Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Nepal. Some moved to
other parts of India in search of better livelihood
opportunity.
His Holiness the Dalai Lama continued to keep himself
informed of conditions of Tibetan Muslims in Idd-Gah.
In 1975 he visited Srinagar and raised their problems
with the Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir.
Following a request from him, the Chief Minister
provided the Tibetan Muslims with land for their
resettlement.
His Holiness also encouraged the formation of a
Tibetan Muslim Refugee Welfare Association. This
Association began to chalk out projects for the
economic and educational upliftment of the community.
With the seed money from His Holiness, followed by
assistance from Tibet Fund in New York, a handicraft
centre, a co-operative shop and a school were
established. A group of young Tibetan Muslims were
invited to Dharamsala to learn the trade of
carpet-weaving and marketing.
The Department of Health in Dharamsala has set up a
primary health care centre to look after the medical
needs of the Muslims.
Saudi Arabia provided funds for the construction of
144 houses and a mosque in the new settlement.
Construction was completed in 1985 and the houses
distributed among the people. Not all people could be
accommodated and some continued to reside in the old
settlement.
There is now a Tibetan Muslim Youth Association which
plays an important role in the social upliftment of
the community, and maintains contact with the
mainstream Tibetan Youth Congress.
Nothing much is known of the present condition of
Tibetan Muslims inside Tibet. According to one report
there are around 3000 Tibetan Muslims there.
The total population of Tibetan Muslims outside Tibet
is around 2000. Of them, 20 to 25 families live in
Nepal, 20 in the Gulf countries and Turkey. Fifty
families reside in Darjeeling-Kalimpong areas
bordering Tibet in eastern India.
They continue to look up to their Muslim brethren
throughout the world for support to the cause of Tibet
so that they can one day return to their homeland and
enjoy the life of dignity that they once enjoyed. A
young Tibetan Muslim in exile, when asked whether he
would return to Tibet in the event of a solution,
responded, "It is better to live under a bridge in
one's own homeland than to live as a refugee in an
alien land."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
US govt asked to bar Modi's entry
Thursday, 24 February , 2005, 08:17
Washington: A Muslim group urged the US government on Wednesday to bar the entry of Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi, who is accused of complicity in post-Godhra riots.
Modi is the guest of honour at the Asian American Hotel Owners' Association's annual convention in Florida next month, the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations said.
"Our nation should not reward a man accused of complicity in the massacre of civilians by granting him a visa or a place of honour at a convention," said Parvez Ahmed, an official of the Muslim advocacy group.
Modi has been accused by the opposition and human rights groups of doing little to stop the bloody riots in Gujarat in 2002, when up to 2,000 Muslims were killed.
National Human Rights Commission and fact-finding teams from embassies stationed in New Delhi accused Modi of turning a blind eye to the riots.
CAIR is seeking to block Modi's entry based on the International Religious Freedom Act, that makes any foreign official engaged in 'particularly severe violations of religious freedom' inadmissible to the United States.
Washington: A Muslim group urged the US government on Wednesday to bar the entry of Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi, who is accused of complicity in post-Godhra riots.
Modi is the guest of honour at the Asian American Hotel Owners' Association's annual convention in Florida next month, the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations said.
"Our nation should not reward a man accused of complicity in the massacre of civilians by granting him a visa or a place of honour at a convention," said Parvez Ahmed, an official of the Muslim advocacy group.
Modi has been accused by the opposition and human rights groups of doing little to stop the bloody riots in Gujarat in 2002, when up to 2,000 Muslims were killed.
National Human Rights Commission and fact-finding teams from embassies stationed in New Delhi accused Modi of turning a blind eye to the riots.
CAIR is seeking to block Modi's entry based on the International Religious Freedom Act, that makes any foreign official engaged in 'particularly severe violations of religious freedom' inadmissible to the United States.
THE GOOD LUCK OF TRAUMATISED AFGHANISTAN
Simon Tisdall
Friday February 25, 2005
The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,1284,1424800,00.html
One woman dies from pregnancy-related causes
approximately every 30 minutes. One in five children
dies before the age of five from diseases that are 80%
preventable.
An estimated one-third of the population suffers from
anxiety, depression or post-traumatic stress. Annual
per capita income is $190 (£100). Average life
expectancy is 44.5 years. Its education system is now
"the worst in the world".
These are just a few of the findings contained in a
United Nations Development Programme report on
Afghanistan published this week.
More than three years after the US and Britain
declared victory in Kabul and promised to rebuild the
country, it paints a disturbing portrait of "a fragile
nation still at odds if no longer at war with itself
that could easily slip back into chaos and abject
poverty".
Not all is gloom. The report says Afghanistan's
economy has expanded significantly since 2001. Nearly
55% of primary-age children are now in school.
About 2.4 million refugees have returned from Pakistan
and Iran. The new constitution guarantees equal rights
for women. And a democratically elected president
holds office, although "factional elements" with their
own militias still control much of the country.
Afghanistan's woes long predate the US war against the
Taliban, stretching back to the 1979 Soviet invasion.
But this present-day audit dramatically demonstrates
the daunting scale of the reconstruction effort to
which the west has pledged itself.
In one respect, Afghanistan is fortunate. Despite
problems over merging US and Nato forces, the
deployment of "provincial reconstruction teams",
squandered aid and a booming heroin trade, a
reasonably coherent and agreed long-term international
strategy for Afghanistan does actually exist.
This is not usually the case elsewhere. For the UN's
findings also indirectly illustrate a more fundamental
dilemma facing other so-called transitional states
such as Iraq, Palestine, East Timor, Kosovo and Haiti
as well as less extreme cases like Ukraine.
While the international community's appetite for
transformational nation-building, stimulated by
President George Bush's crusade for global freedom,
shows no sign of satiation, it habitually bites off
more than it can chew.
Now the growing institutional rivalry between the US
and Europe, not dispelled by this week's Brussels
summitry, is in danger of further undermining
collective efforts.
The minimalist Nato agreement on military and police
training in Iraq, with France grudgingly agreeing to
contribute one mid-level headquarters officer, gave
the lie to claims that Euro-Atlantic war wounds have
healed. Five leading EU countries still refuse point
blank to let their soldiers set foot in Iraq.
The EU decision to launch a civilian training mission
in Baghdad only served as a reminder of Europe's
rising ambition to act as an independent international
player.
Europe's use of trade incentives with Iran and Syria,
on which the US has imposed trade sanctions, and its
attempts to engage North Korea also exemplify this
diverging diplomatic and philosophical approach.
It is these structural problems that Gerhard Schröder
addressed in his recent speech on facilitating the
Euro-Atlantic dialogue. The German chancellor's call
for "a strong European pillar" with equal
responsibilities was interpreted as widening the
transatlantic divide.
In fact his speech was a timely if clumsy attempt to
close the gap by building more coherent joint
platforms for managing the growing list of
nation-building and aid projects which, if Mr Bush has
his way, could one day include Zimbabwe, Sudan, North
Korea, Burma and Belarus.
The US and Europe must work together more effectively,
Mr Schröder said. "We should focus with determination
on adapting our cooperation structures to changed
conditions and challenges.
"We need a strong multilateral system which provides a
reliable framework for solidarity and guarantees good
global governance." If that upset existing hierarchies
such as Nato, he seemed to say, well, tough.
His reform proposals have been met with shrugs in
Britain and the US, although not in France. But Mr
Schröder put his finger on a problem that will have to
be addressed sooner or later. The children of
Afghanistan would say sooner.
Friday February 25, 2005
The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,1284,1424800,00.html
One woman dies from pregnancy-related causes
approximately every 30 minutes. One in five children
dies before the age of five from diseases that are 80%
preventable.
An estimated one-third of the population suffers from
anxiety, depression or post-traumatic stress. Annual
per capita income is $190 (£100). Average life
expectancy is 44.5 years. Its education system is now
"the worst in the world".
These are just a few of the findings contained in a
United Nations Development Programme report on
Afghanistan published this week.
More than three years after the US and Britain
declared victory in Kabul and promised to rebuild the
country, it paints a disturbing portrait of "a fragile
nation still at odds if no longer at war with itself
that could easily slip back into chaos and abject
poverty".
Not all is gloom. The report says Afghanistan's
economy has expanded significantly since 2001. Nearly
55% of primary-age children are now in school.
About 2.4 million refugees have returned from Pakistan
and Iran. The new constitution guarantees equal rights
for women. And a democratically elected president
holds office, although "factional elements" with their
own militias still control much of the country.
Afghanistan's woes long predate the US war against the
Taliban, stretching back to the 1979 Soviet invasion.
But this present-day audit dramatically demonstrates
the daunting scale of the reconstruction effort to
which the west has pledged itself.
In one respect, Afghanistan is fortunate. Despite
problems over merging US and Nato forces, the
deployment of "provincial reconstruction teams",
squandered aid and a booming heroin trade, a
reasonably coherent and agreed long-term international
strategy for Afghanistan does actually exist.
This is not usually the case elsewhere. For the UN's
findings also indirectly illustrate a more fundamental
dilemma facing other so-called transitional states
such as Iraq, Palestine, East Timor, Kosovo and Haiti
as well as less extreme cases like Ukraine.
While the international community's appetite for
transformational nation-building, stimulated by
President George Bush's crusade for global freedom,
shows no sign of satiation, it habitually bites off
more than it can chew.
Now the growing institutional rivalry between the US
and Europe, not dispelled by this week's Brussels
summitry, is in danger of further undermining
collective efforts.
The minimalist Nato agreement on military and police
training in Iraq, with France grudgingly agreeing to
contribute one mid-level headquarters officer, gave
the lie to claims that Euro-Atlantic war wounds have
healed. Five leading EU countries still refuse point
blank to let their soldiers set foot in Iraq.
The EU decision to launch a civilian training mission
in Baghdad only served as a reminder of Europe's
rising ambition to act as an independent international
player.
Europe's use of trade incentives with Iran and Syria,
on which the US has imposed trade sanctions, and its
attempts to engage North Korea also exemplify this
diverging diplomatic and philosophical approach.
It is these structural problems that Gerhard Schröder
addressed in his recent speech on facilitating the
Euro-Atlantic dialogue. The German chancellor's call
for "a strong European pillar" with equal
responsibilities was interpreted as widening the
transatlantic divide.
In fact his speech was a timely if clumsy attempt to
close the gap by building more coherent joint
platforms for managing the growing list of
nation-building and aid projects which, if Mr Bush has
his way, could one day include Zimbabwe, Sudan, North
Korea, Burma and Belarus.
The US and Europe must work together more effectively,
Mr Schröder said. "We should focus with determination
on adapting our cooperation structures to changed
conditions and challenges.
"We need a strong multilateral system which provides a
reliable framework for solidarity and guarantees good
global governance." If that upset existing hierarchies
such as Nato, he seemed to say, well, tough.
His reform proposals have been met with shrugs in
Britain and the US, although not in France. But Mr
Schröder put his finger on a problem that will have to
be addressed sooner or later. The children of
Afghanistan would say sooner.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)