By IANS,
Dimapur (Nagaland): Thuingaleng Muivah, general secretary of the rebel group National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN-IM), arrives in New Delhi Sunday to carry forward the stalled Naga peace talks, union home secretary Gopal Krishna Pillai said here Saturday.
"The NSCN-IM leaders have accepted the government invitation to resume the peace dialogue between New Delhi and the Naga organisation," Pillai told reporters in the Nagaland city Dimapur after attending a passing out parade of paramilitary Assam Rifles.
"The NSCN-IM leader would meet Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram next week."
It is not officially known where exactly Muivah is based outside India. He had last visited India in December 2006 with NSCN-IM chairman Isak Chisi Swu and held talks with the government.
"Efforts are also on to include other Naga groups, including the Khaplang faction of the NSCN, as demanded by the Naga people. Naga communities have felt that for a permanent solution to the vexed ethnic conflict, holding of talks with all Naga factions are essential," Pillai stated.
The centre earlier this month had appointed former petroleum secretary R.S. Pandey as its new interlocutor to facilitate dialogue with the major insurgent outfit, NSCN-IM, which had entered into a ceasefire with the Indian government in August 1997.
Replacing former chief negotiator K. Padmanabhaiah, Pandey has been chosen for the assignment as he has served as chief secretary in Nagaland and is said to have a good grasp of the issues that have led to the long spell of insurgency in the northeastern state.
The last round of inconclusive peace talks between the central government and the leading Naga separatist outfit was held in March 2009 in Zurich, Switzerland.
The NSCN faction led by guerrilla leader S.S. Khaplang entered into a ceasefire in 2001 but formal peace talks are yet to begin.
The NSCN-IM, one of the oldest and most powerful of about 30 rebel groups in India's northeast, was earlier fighting for an independent homeland for the Nagas, but has scaled it down to a Greater Nagaland, proposed to be formed by slicing off parts of adjoining states that have Naga tribal populations.
The governments of Assam, Manipur and Arunachal Pradesh have rejected the demand for unification of Naga-dominated areas. The union government too had earlier rejected demands for unification of all Naga-inhabited areas.
Saturday, February 27, 2010
India, Saudi to share information on terrorist movement, arms, drugs
By Aroonim Bhuyan, IANS,
Riyadh: Security and counter-terrorism measures will get top priority during Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to Saudi Arabia, says India's Ambassador to Saudi Arabia Talmiz Ahmad.
"This visit, taking place four years after the visit of (Saudi Arabia's) King Abdullah (Bin Abdul Aziz) to India will give both sides an opportunity to discuss important global and regional issues," Ahmad told IANS.
"The presence of Taliban in Afghanistan, in Pakistan and along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border is a matter of deep concern. After all, it is the Taliban that is funding the Al-Qaeda," he said.
According to the ambassador, the meeting between the prime minister and King Abdullah will review this terrorism issue.
India and Saudi Arabia are set to sign a historic extradition treaty during the course of Manmohan Singh's visit, the first by an Indian prime minister to that Gulf nation in 28 years after the visit of then prime minister Indira Gandhi in 1982.
"Twenty years back, India's concerns about the growth of such organizations were not taken seriously even by the West. Nowadays, these countries as also Saudi Arabia are victims of terrorism," Ambassador Ahmad, for whom this is his second stint as ambassador in Riyadh, said.
"Only recently, 133 Saudi soldiers were killed fighting rebels in Yemen," he said.
Stating that Saudi Arabia has a lot of information that could be shared with India and so could India, he said all arrangements would be put in place so that bilateral cooperation in this regard happens at the topmost level.
The two sides will sign a historic extradition treaty during the course of the prime minister's visit.
"The two countries will exchange information on movement of terrorists, drugs and arms," Ahmad said.
At the same time, he stated that all future strategic ties needed a sound economic basis.
"After the global financial crisis, India has emerged as an important partner for Saudi Arabia. For Saudi Arabia it is matter of deep importance to develop strong economic ties with India," he said.
"The Saudi side wants Indian companies for JVs (joint ventures) and the help of Indian IT companies to develop their knowledge industry."
As far as energy security is concerned - Saudi Arabia is the largest supplier of crude oil to India - the ambassador said efforts were on from India's part to meet the requirements of the Saudi side.
The historic Delhi Declaration signed during the visit of King Abdullah in 2006 talks of taking the buyer-seller relationship between the two sides when it came to petroleum products to a more participatory level.
"We are trying to bridge the gap between what we offer and what they want," Ambassador Ahmad said.
As for the 1.6-million strong expatriate Indian population in that Gulf nation, he said that a number of community welfare initiatives have been taken by the embassy with India's Minsitry of Overseas Indian Affairs playing an active role.
"The welfare of the Indian community in Saudi Arabia is a joint responsibility of both India and Saudi Arabia and Saudi Arabia has agreed to this," Ahmad said.
Riyadh: Security and counter-terrorism measures will get top priority during Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to Saudi Arabia, says India's Ambassador to Saudi Arabia Talmiz Ahmad.
"This visit, taking place four years after the visit of (Saudi Arabia's) King Abdullah (Bin Abdul Aziz) to India will give both sides an opportunity to discuss important global and regional issues," Ahmad told IANS.
"The presence of Taliban in Afghanistan, in Pakistan and along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border is a matter of deep concern. After all, it is the Taliban that is funding the Al-Qaeda," he said.
According to the ambassador, the meeting between the prime minister and King Abdullah will review this terrorism issue.
India and Saudi Arabia are set to sign a historic extradition treaty during the course of Manmohan Singh's visit, the first by an Indian prime minister to that Gulf nation in 28 years after the visit of then prime minister Indira Gandhi in 1982.
"Twenty years back, India's concerns about the growth of such organizations were not taken seriously even by the West. Nowadays, these countries as also Saudi Arabia are victims of terrorism," Ambassador Ahmad, for whom this is his second stint as ambassador in Riyadh, said.
"Only recently, 133 Saudi soldiers were killed fighting rebels in Yemen," he said.
Stating that Saudi Arabia has a lot of information that could be shared with India and so could India, he said all arrangements would be put in place so that bilateral cooperation in this regard happens at the topmost level.
The two sides will sign a historic extradition treaty during the course of the prime minister's visit.
"The two countries will exchange information on movement of terrorists, drugs and arms," Ahmad said.
At the same time, he stated that all future strategic ties needed a sound economic basis.
"After the global financial crisis, India has emerged as an important partner for Saudi Arabia. For Saudi Arabia it is matter of deep importance to develop strong economic ties with India," he said.
"The Saudi side wants Indian companies for JVs (joint ventures) and the help of Indian IT companies to develop their knowledge industry."
As far as energy security is concerned - Saudi Arabia is the largest supplier of crude oil to India - the ambassador said efforts were on from India's part to meet the requirements of the Saudi side.
The historic Delhi Declaration signed during the visit of King Abdullah in 2006 talks of taking the buyer-seller relationship between the two sides when it came to petroleum products to a more participatory level.
"We are trying to bridge the gap between what we offer and what they want," Ambassador Ahmad said.
As for the 1.6-million strong expatriate Indian population in that Gulf nation, he said that a number of community welfare initiatives have been taken by the embassy with India's Minsitry of Overseas Indian Affairs playing an active role.
"The welfare of the Indian community in Saudi Arabia is a joint responsibility of both India and Saudi Arabia and Saudi Arabia has agreed to this," Ahmad said.
Some facts on Saudi-India relations
By IANS,
New Delhi: Manmohan Singh arrived in Saudi Arabia Saturday evening on a three-day visit, the first by an Indian prime minister since 1982. Here are some salient facts about bilateral relations between the two countries:
- Saudi Arabia is India's fourth largest trading partner with two-way trade of over $25 billion.
- The kingdom is the largest supplier of hydrocarbons to India, accounting for 20 percent of crude oil imports.
- There are around 500 Indian joint ventures in Saudi Arabia with an estimated investment of over $2 billion.
- Manmohan Singh's address to the Shura Council will be a singular honour. The council is an influential body of the top intellectual elite of Saudi Arabia, all nominated by the Saudi king.
- Since King Abdullah's visit to India in 2006, the two sides have had 19 exchanges at the ministerial level and trade has tripled during this time.
- Some 1.8 million Indians, out of an estimated 5 million in the Gulf countries, live in Saudi Arabia.
- India accounted for 167,000 Haj pilgrims last year, the highest ever.
- Manmohan Singh's visit comes 28 years after then prime minister Indira Gandhi visited Saudi Arabia in 1982.
http://twocircles.net/2010feb27/some...relations.html
New Delhi: Manmohan Singh arrived in Saudi Arabia Saturday evening on a three-day visit, the first by an Indian prime minister since 1982. Here are some salient facts about bilateral relations between the two countries:
- Saudi Arabia is India's fourth largest trading partner with two-way trade of over $25 billion.
- The kingdom is the largest supplier of hydrocarbons to India, accounting for 20 percent of crude oil imports.
- There are around 500 Indian joint ventures in Saudi Arabia with an estimated investment of over $2 billion.
- Manmohan Singh's address to the Shura Council will be a singular honour. The council is an influential body of the top intellectual elite of Saudi Arabia, all nominated by the Saudi king.
- Since King Abdullah's visit to India in 2006, the two sides have had 19 exchanges at the ministerial level and trade has tripled during this time.
- Some 1.8 million Indians, out of an estimated 5 million in the Gulf countries, live in Saudi Arabia.
- India accounted for 167,000 Haj pilgrims last year, the highest ever.
- Manmohan Singh's visit comes 28 years after then prime minister Indira Gandhi visited Saudi Arabia in 1982.
http://twocircles.net/2010feb27/some...relations.html
Unprecedented welcome for PM in Saudi Arabia
By Aroonim Bhuyan, IANS,
Riyadh: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh arrived in Saudi Arabia Saturday evening to a historic welcome with the kingdom\'s crown prince and the entire Saudi cabinet turning up at the airport to receive him.
In an unprecedented gesture, Crown Prince Sultan Bin Abdul Aziz, Defence Minister, Minister for Civil Aviation and First Deputy Prime Minister, Prince Naif Bin Abdul Aziz, Interior Minister and the Second Deputy Prime Minister, Prince Salman Bin Abdul Aziz, the governor of Riyadh, and the entire Saudi cabinet set aside protocol and received the prime minister and his wife Gursharan Kaur at the Royal Terminal of the King Khaled International Airport.
It may be recalled that when Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah Bin Abdul Aziz had visited India in 2006, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had broken protocol to receive the monarch personally at the airport.
On Saturday, as the prime minister's cavalcade zipped across from the airport to the city, the entire stretch had Indian and Saudi flags flying.
And in what is going to be yet another significant gesture, the prime minister will be officially welcomed by King Abdullah Bin Abdul Aziz at a function Sunday.
According to official sources, no foreign dignitary has ever been accorded such a welcome.
The prime minister and his delegation will also be staying in a palace that has never been opened before and certainly not to any visiting foreign dignitary - the King Saud Guest Palace.
The prime minister's visit comes four years after the visit of Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah Bin Abdul Aziz to New Delhi in 2006 when the latter was honoured as the chief guest at the Republic Day parade and the historic Delhi Declaration, charting out a new path of bilateral cooperation across a wide range of fields between India and the largest and most influential Gulf nation, was signed.
Apart from the summit meeting between Manmohan Singh and King Abdullah, Saudi Arabia's Minister for Oil and Mineral Resources Ali Al Naimi, Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al Faisal, and Minister for Commerce and Industry Abdulla Zainal Ali Reza are expected to call on the prime minister.
Among those accompanying Manmohan Singh are Minister for Health and Family Welfare Ghulam Nabi Azad, Minister for Commerce and Industry Anand Sharma, Minister for Petroleum and Gas Murli Deora and Minister of State for External Affairs Shashi Tharoor.
Around 10 agreements in the fields of security, science and technology, are expected to be signed between the two sides during the course of the visit that will last till March 1.
Among the major highlights will be the signing of an extradition treaty between India and Saudi Arabia and the setting up of a joint investment fund.
Manmohan Singh is the third Indian prime minister to visit Saudi Arabia.
Soon after independence, then prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru visited this Gulf nation in 1956 when he was hailed as a hero here. That was actually a return visit after King Fahd visited India the preceding year.
Then, in 1982, Indira Gandhi visited this country and that was the last visit by an Indian prime minister till now.
Riyadh: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh arrived in Saudi Arabia Saturday evening to a historic welcome with the kingdom\'s crown prince and the entire Saudi cabinet turning up at the airport to receive him.
In an unprecedented gesture, Crown Prince Sultan Bin Abdul Aziz, Defence Minister, Minister for Civil Aviation and First Deputy Prime Minister, Prince Naif Bin Abdul Aziz, Interior Minister and the Second Deputy Prime Minister, Prince Salman Bin Abdul Aziz, the governor of Riyadh, and the entire Saudi cabinet set aside protocol and received the prime minister and his wife Gursharan Kaur at the Royal Terminal of the King Khaled International Airport.
It may be recalled that when Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah Bin Abdul Aziz had visited India in 2006, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had broken protocol to receive the monarch personally at the airport.
On Saturday, as the prime minister's cavalcade zipped across from the airport to the city, the entire stretch had Indian and Saudi flags flying.
And in what is going to be yet another significant gesture, the prime minister will be officially welcomed by King Abdullah Bin Abdul Aziz at a function Sunday.
According to official sources, no foreign dignitary has ever been accorded such a welcome.
The prime minister and his delegation will also be staying in a palace that has never been opened before and certainly not to any visiting foreign dignitary - the King Saud Guest Palace.
The prime minister's visit comes four years after the visit of Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah Bin Abdul Aziz to New Delhi in 2006 when the latter was honoured as the chief guest at the Republic Day parade and the historic Delhi Declaration, charting out a new path of bilateral cooperation across a wide range of fields between India and the largest and most influential Gulf nation, was signed.
Apart from the summit meeting between Manmohan Singh and King Abdullah, Saudi Arabia's Minister for Oil and Mineral Resources Ali Al Naimi, Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al Faisal, and Minister for Commerce and Industry Abdulla Zainal Ali Reza are expected to call on the prime minister.
Among those accompanying Manmohan Singh are Minister for Health and Family Welfare Ghulam Nabi Azad, Minister for Commerce and Industry Anand Sharma, Minister for Petroleum and Gas Murli Deora and Minister of State for External Affairs Shashi Tharoor.
Around 10 agreements in the fields of security, science and technology, are expected to be signed between the two sides during the course of the visit that will last till March 1.
Among the major highlights will be the signing of an extradition treaty between India and Saudi Arabia and the setting up of a joint investment fund.
Manmohan Singh is the third Indian prime minister to visit Saudi Arabia.
Soon after independence, then prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru visited this Gulf nation in 1956 when he was hailed as a hero here. That was actually a return visit after King Fahd visited India the preceding year.
Then, in 1982, Indira Gandhi visited this country and that was the last visit by an Indian prime minister till now.
Choosing Between Hijab & Career
CAIRO – One year before graduation to become a doctor, Turkish medical student Fatma Orgel was put in a bitter choice; to take off her hijab or give up her dream of a medical career.
“I could either not finish my degree, or go to another country to study,” Orgel told The Sydney Morning Herald Saturday, February 27.
One year before Orgel’s graduation, Turkey enacted a law in 1999 banning hijab on campus.
The legislation left the young Turkish student torn apart between her aspiration of becoming a doctor and her hijab, an obligatory code of dress.
“When the ban came into force my parents saw their dreams of me becoming a doctor disappearing,” Orgel, now 35, recalled.
“They begged me to take off the headscarf and keep going to university.”
But, Orgel, who grew up in a traditional family to a religious teacher and a housewife in the south-west city of Antalya, could not think of taking off her veil.
Eventually, she took the hard decision of going abroad to Hungary to complete her medical studies.
“I said no,” she recalled.
“In the end I was lucky and I found a way to continue my studies, but most others cannot do this.”
Completing her studies, Orgel returned to Turkey to stumble with the hijab ban in government offices, leaving her with no option but to leave the country for London for working as doctor.
“I worked there for 12 months and I forgot I was even wearing the headscarf,” she said.
“No one cared. I kept having to tell myself that I was wearing it, even though I was working in a big state hospital.”
Hijab has long been a highly divisive issue in the overwhelmingly Muslim but secular Turkey.
It has been banned in public buildings, universities, schools and government buildings since shortly after a 1980 military coup.
In February 2008, the parliament voted to overturn the ban on wearing the headscarf on campus, but the decision was later overturned by the High Court on the ground it infringed the country's secularist principles.
Why
Orgel says that lots of misunderstanding are prevailing in secular Turkey about hijab and modernization.
“The Turkish nation always looks to the West, to Europe, and believes that banning the headscarf is a step towards modernization,” she said.
The Turkish doctor said that the ban discriminates against hijab-clad women who want to abide by the Islamic teachings.
“The real effect is the opposite,” said Orgel.
“It means that women who observe the Qur’an are barred from a university education.”
The hijab ban also denies Turkish women who are aspiring to escape a lower socio-economic class the opportunity.
“When Islam is viewed from the outside, many see the scarf as the symbol of repression, that we are being forced to do this against our will,” she said.
“I made the decision when I was around 15 that I would wear the headscarf. It became part of my spirituality, part of my perception of life.”
Orgel is now a member of the executive board of AKDER, a human rights organization that fights discrimination against Muslim women.
“Why is wearing the headscarf not my decision?” Dr Orgel asks.
“If I decide to wear the headscarf, then I should be able to wear it. Why should I not be free to make my own decisions?”
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1235339923464&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout
“I could either not finish my degree, or go to another country to study,” Orgel told The Sydney Morning Herald Saturday, February 27.
One year before Orgel’s graduation, Turkey enacted a law in 1999 banning hijab on campus.
The legislation left the young Turkish student torn apart between her aspiration of becoming a doctor and her hijab, an obligatory code of dress.
“When the ban came into force my parents saw their dreams of me becoming a doctor disappearing,” Orgel, now 35, recalled.
“They begged me to take off the headscarf and keep going to university.”
But, Orgel, who grew up in a traditional family to a religious teacher and a housewife in the south-west city of Antalya, could not think of taking off her veil.
Eventually, she took the hard decision of going abroad to Hungary to complete her medical studies.
“I said no,” she recalled.
“In the end I was lucky and I found a way to continue my studies, but most others cannot do this.”
Completing her studies, Orgel returned to Turkey to stumble with the hijab ban in government offices, leaving her with no option but to leave the country for London for working as doctor.
“I worked there for 12 months and I forgot I was even wearing the headscarf,” she said.
“No one cared. I kept having to tell myself that I was wearing it, even though I was working in a big state hospital.”
Hijab has long been a highly divisive issue in the overwhelmingly Muslim but secular Turkey.
It has been banned in public buildings, universities, schools and government buildings since shortly after a 1980 military coup.
In February 2008, the parliament voted to overturn the ban on wearing the headscarf on campus, but the decision was later overturned by the High Court on the ground it infringed the country's secularist principles.
Why
Orgel says that lots of misunderstanding are prevailing in secular Turkey about hijab and modernization.
“The Turkish nation always looks to the West, to Europe, and believes that banning the headscarf is a step towards modernization,” she said.
The Turkish doctor said that the ban discriminates against hijab-clad women who want to abide by the Islamic teachings.
“The real effect is the opposite,” said Orgel.
“It means that women who observe the Qur’an are barred from a university education.”
The hijab ban also denies Turkish women who are aspiring to escape a lower socio-economic class the opportunity.
“When Islam is viewed from the outside, many see the scarf as the symbol of repression, that we are being forced to do this against our will,” she said.
“I made the decision when I was around 15 that I would wear the headscarf. It became part of my spirituality, part of my perception of life.”
Orgel is now a member of the executive board of AKDER, a human rights organization that fights discrimination against Muslim women.
“Why is wearing the headscarf not my decision?” Dr Orgel asks.
“If I decide to wear the headscarf, then I should be able to wear it. Why should I not be free to make my own decisions?”
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1235339923464&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout
Living Under Israel's Jewish Law
The Status of Non-Jews Under the Halacha
Remarks by the Israeli Minister of Interior Yaakov Neeman suggesting that the Jewish religious law (Halacha) should be adopted as the "law of the land" in the Jewish state has drawn strong reactions from both Jews and non-Jews.
"Step by step, we will bestow upon the citizens of Israel the laws of the Torah and we will turn Halacha into the binding law of the nation," Neeman told Rabbis at a Jewish law convention in occupied Jerusalem in December 2009.
"We must bring back the heritage of our fathers to the nation of Israel," he said. "The torah has the complete solution to all of the questions we are dealing with."
Neeman's statements were met applauds from participants who included high-ranking Rabbis, as well as representatives of religious parties.
However, for non-Jews, who now constitute nearly 50 percent of the total population in occupied Palestine, Neeman's remarks are a serious cause for concern since Halacha, at least according to the Orthodox Jewish interpretation, does not recognize the full humanity of non-Jews.
Hence, non-Jews living under Halacha must accept to live under a perpetual state of inferiority, if not persecution.
Lesser in Every Aspect
According to Orthodox Judaism, a non-Jew (goy) is inferior to a Jew in every conceivable aspect. This inferiority is absolute, inherent, intrinsic, and not subject to any related or unrelated factors.
Rabbi Abraham Kook, the religious mentor of the settler movement, taught that "the difference between a Jewish soul and souls of non-Jews — all of them in all different levels — is greater and deeper than the difference between a human soul and the souls of cattle."
The teachings of Kook are based on the Lurianic Cabala (Jewish mysticism), which teaches the absolute superiority of the Jewish soul and body over the non-Jewish soul and body. This means, according to one Rabbi who is member of the Chabadi Lubovitcher sect, that "every simple cell in a Jewish body entails divinity and is part of God."
In 2003, Rabbi Saadya Grama of the Beth Medrash Govoha, the renowned Talmudic school of Lakewood, NJ, published a book in which he claimed that Gentiles were completely evil and that Jews constituted a separate, genetically superior species.
The book published under the Hebrew Title "Romemut Yisrael Ufarsahat Hagalut" quoted numerous classical Jewish sources to prove Jewish superiority over the rest of humankind.
The difference between Jews and gentiles, he argued, is not religious, historical, cultural, or political. It is rather racial, genetic, and scientifically unalterable. The one groups is at its very root and by natural constitution "totally evil" while the other is "totally good"
"Jewish successes in the world are completely contingent upon the failure of all other peoples. Only when the gentiles face total catastrophe, Jews do experience good fortune."
"The Jews themselves brought about their own destruction during the Holocaust, since they arrogantly endeavored to overcome their very essence, dictated by divine law."
While castigated by many Jewish figures, religious and secular, for its brazen racism, Grama's thesis is not really in conflict with the Rabbis of Gush Emunim (the settler camp) and the rest of the National religious movement in Israel today.
He readily applies Torah passages against idolaters, other pagans to Christianity and Islam, and other monotheists who worship the God of Abraham, the very God proclaimed by the Torah.
He also ignores extensive Rabbinic deliberations during the medieval period, which concluded that both Islam and Christianity as "licit, monotheistic faiths."
Hence, Muslims and Christians could not be lumped in one category with the idol-worshipers of earlier times.
Sub-human Slaves
If gentiles (goyem) are inherently inferior to Jews, and if their very humanity is presumed to be denied, it is axiomatically inferred from this that these gentiles have inherently lesser rights than Jews do.
Indeed, some Talmudic references do refer to gentiles as "animals walking on two feet instead of four".
Even today, some Rabbis, such as David Batsri, invoke the "bestiality" of non-Jews, claiming that the Creator created them with two legs instead of four in deference to Jews, because it is not appropriate that Jews be served with four-legged animals.
It is true that this view is not shared by all Rabbis, especially the enlightened ones. However, it is also true that some prominent sages holding both Halachic and historical weight are among the main advocates of this pure racism.
For example, according to the code of Maimonides (Rambam): "A Jew who killed a non-Jew is exempt from human judgment, and has not violated the prohibition of murder."
This code is implicitly practiced by Jewish settler judges when dealing with Jews convicted of killing Palestinians, which explains the extremely light punishments meted out to the perpetrators, especially in comparison to Arabs convicted of the same felony.
It also explains why Israelis in general and religious settlers in particularly dwell so much upon "shedding Jewish blood" while never showing the slightest concern about Arabs killed by Jews.
Following the 1994 massacre of dozens of Arab worshipers at the Ibrahimi Mosque at the hands of an American-born Jewish terrorists, Moshe Levinger, a settler leader in the City of Al-Khalil (Hebron) was quoted as saying : "I am not only sorry for dead Arabs, but also for dead flies."
The application of Jewish law in occupied Palestine (Israel plus the West Bank and Al-Quds) would mean that Palestinians who do not convert to Judaism (at the hands of an Orthodox Rabbi) would have to be treated as "residents alien".
According to Maimonides, a gentile permitted to reside in the land of Israel, "must accept to pay taxes and to suffer the humiliation of servitude."
Such gentiles, some modern Rabbis insist, "must be held down and not raise their heads against Jews. Non-Jews must not be appointed to any office or position of power over Jews. If they refuse to live a life of inferiority, then this will signify rebellion and the unavoidable necessity of Jewish warfare against their very presence in the land of Israel."
Chutzpah
This inferiority accorded to non-Jews, which is summarized by the phrase "water carriers and wood-hewers", is actually an award for the submissiveness of the pacified and subjugated gentiles.
As to "restive" gentiles in the land of Israel, like those demanding equal human and civil rights as citizens, their punishment is usually expulsion or outright extermination.
According to Shulhan Aruch, widely viewed as the most authoritative legalistic source of Jewish religious law, the murder of a Jew is a capital offence and one of the three most heinous sins (the other two being idolatry and adultery).
Jewish religious courts are commanded to mercilessly punish anyone guilty of killing a Jew. However, a Jew who murders a gentile, even deliberately, is guilty of committing a sin against the "laws of heaven" and ought to be published by God rather than man.
However, a gentile murderer living under Jewish jurisdiction must be executed, regardless of whether the victim is Jewish or gentile.
However, if the victim is gentile and the murderer is a Jew who had converted to Judaism, he is not to be punished.
Maimonides also rules that while Jews are forbidden to save the lives of non-Jews in peacetime, they are also forbidden to murder them outright.
"As for gentiles with whom we are not at war, their death must not be caused, but it is forbidden to save them if they are at the point of death; if, for example, one of them is seen falling into the sea, he should not be rescued, for it is written. Neither shall thou stand against the blood of thy fellow, but a gentile is not your fellow."
Bluntly, anti-gentile codes are also proscribed against non-Jews living under Jewish (religious) rule. This covers the entire penal code. For example, there is an obvious discrimination against non-Jewish citizens in applying punishment for rape and adultery.
According to Israel Shahak's classical book "Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years," Halacha presumes that all gentiles are promiscuous and presumed not to have paternity."
For an example, a sexual intercourse between a gentile and a married Jewish woman is a capital offense for both parties, which is punishable by death for both.
However, a sexual intercourse between a Jewish male and a gentile woman — it does not matter if she is married or not since the concept of marriage doesn't apply to gentiles — is not viewed as gravely as the Talmud equates such intercourse with an intercourse with animals.
A Biblical verse states: "For she doted upon their paramours, whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horses." [King James Bible, the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel 23:20]. That verse is presumably applied to non-Jews"
In this case, death is proscribed for the gentile woman, while the Jew, even if it is a case of rape, is given a much lighter punishment, like flogging.
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1265890518301&pagename=Zone-English-Muslim_Affairs%2FMAELayout
Remarks by the Israeli Minister of Interior Yaakov Neeman suggesting that the Jewish religious law (Halacha) should be adopted as the "law of the land" in the Jewish state has drawn strong reactions from both Jews and non-Jews.
"Step by step, we will bestow upon the citizens of Israel the laws of the Torah and we will turn Halacha into the binding law of the nation," Neeman told Rabbis at a Jewish law convention in occupied Jerusalem in December 2009.
"We must bring back the heritage of our fathers to the nation of Israel," he said. "The torah has the complete solution to all of the questions we are dealing with."
Neeman's statements were met applauds from participants who included high-ranking Rabbis, as well as representatives of religious parties.
However, for non-Jews, who now constitute nearly 50 percent of the total population in occupied Palestine, Neeman's remarks are a serious cause for concern since Halacha, at least according to the Orthodox Jewish interpretation, does not recognize the full humanity of non-Jews.
Hence, non-Jews living under Halacha must accept to live under a perpetual state of inferiority, if not persecution.
Lesser in Every Aspect
According to Orthodox Judaism, a non-Jew (goy) is inferior to a Jew in every conceivable aspect. This inferiority is absolute, inherent, intrinsic, and not subject to any related or unrelated factors.
Rabbi Abraham Kook, the religious mentor of the settler movement, taught that "the difference between a Jewish soul and souls of non-Jews — all of them in all different levels — is greater and deeper than the difference between a human soul and the souls of cattle."
The teachings of Kook are based on the Lurianic Cabala (Jewish mysticism), which teaches the absolute superiority of the Jewish soul and body over the non-Jewish soul and body. This means, according to one Rabbi who is member of the Chabadi Lubovitcher sect, that "every simple cell in a Jewish body entails divinity and is part of God."
In 2003, Rabbi Saadya Grama of the Beth Medrash Govoha, the renowned Talmudic school of Lakewood, NJ, published a book in which he claimed that Gentiles were completely evil and that Jews constituted a separate, genetically superior species.
The book published under the Hebrew Title "Romemut Yisrael Ufarsahat Hagalut" quoted numerous classical Jewish sources to prove Jewish superiority over the rest of humankind.
The difference between Jews and gentiles, he argued, is not religious, historical, cultural, or political. It is rather racial, genetic, and scientifically unalterable. The one groups is at its very root and by natural constitution "totally evil" while the other is "totally good"
"Jewish successes in the world are completely contingent upon the failure of all other peoples. Only when the gentiles face total catastrophe, Jews do experience good fortune."
"The Jews themselves brought about their own destruction during the Holocaust, since they arrogantly endeavored to overcome their very essence, dictated by divine law."
While castigated by many Jewish figures, religious and secular, for its brazen racism, Grama's thesis is not really in conflict with the Rabbis of Gush Emunim (the settler camp) and the rest of the National religious movement in Israel today.
He readily applies Torah passages against idolaters, other pagans to Christianity and Islam, and other monotheists who worship the God of Abraham, the very God proclaimed by the Torah.
He also ignores extensive Rabbinic deliberations during the medieval period, which concluded that both Islam and Christianity as "licit, monotheistic faiths."
Hence, Muslims and Christians could not be lumped in one category with the idol-worshipers of earlier times.
Sub-human Slaves
If gentiles (goyem) are inherently inferior to Jews, and if their very humanity is presumed to be denied, it is axiomatically inferred from this that these gentiles have inherently lesser rights than Jews do.
Indeed, some Talmudic references do refer to gentiles as "animals walking on two feet instead of four".
Even today, some Rabbis, such as David Batsri, invoke the "bestiality" of non-Jews, claiming that the Creator created them with two legs instead of four in deference to Jews, because it is not appropriate that Jews be served with four-legged animals.
It is true that this view is not shared by all Rabbis, especially the enlightened ones. However, it is also true that some prominent sages holding both Halachic and historical weight are among the main advocates of this pure racism.
For example, according to the code of Maimonides (Rambam): "A Jew who killed a non-Jew is exempt from human judgment, and has not violated the prohibition of murder."
This code is implicitly practiced by Jewish settler judges when dealing with Jews convicted of killing Palestinians, which explains the extremely light punishments meted out to the perpetrators, especially in comparison to Arabs convicted of the same felony.
It also explains why Israelis in general and religious settlers in particularly dwell so much upon "shedding Jewish blood" while never showing the slightest concern about Arabs killed by Jews.
Following the 1994 massacre of dozens of Arab worshipers at the Ibrahimi Mosque at the hands of an American-born Jewish terrorists, Moshe Levinger, a settler leader in the City of Al-Khalil (Hebron) was quoted as saying : "I am not only sorry for dead Arabs, but also for dead flies."
The application of Jewish law in occupied Palestine (Israel plus the West Bank and Al-Quds) would mean that Palestinians who do not convert to Judaism (at the hands of an Orthodox Rabbi) would have to be treated as "residents alien".
According to Maimonides, a gentile permitted to reside in the land of Israel, "must accept to pay taxes and to suffer the humiliation of servitude."
Such gentiles, some modern Rabbis insist, "must be held down and not raise their heads against Jews. Non-Jews must not be appointed to any office or position of power over Jews. If they refuse to live a life of inferiority, then this will signify rebellion and the unavoidable necessity of Jewish warfare against their very presence in the land of Israel."
Chutzpah
This inferiority accorded to non-Jews, which is summarized by the phrase "water carriers and wood-hewers", is actually an award for the submissiveness of the pacified and subjugated gentiles.
As to "restive" gentiles in the land of Israel, like those demanding equal human and civil rights as citizens, their punishment is usually expulsion or outright extermination.
According to Shulhan Aruch, widely viewed as the most authoritative legalistic source of Jewish religious law, the murder of a Jew is a capital offence and one of the three most heinous sins (the other two being idolatry and adultery).
Jewish religious courts are commanded to mercilessly punish anyone guilty of killing a Jew. However, a Jew who murders a gentile, even deliberately, is guilty of committing a sin against the "laws of heaven" and ought to be published by God rather than man.
However, a gentile murderer living under Jewish jurisdiction must be executed, regardless of whether the victim is Jewish or gentile.
However, if the victim is gentile and the murderer is a Jew who had converted to Judaism, he is not to be punished.
Maimonides also rules that while Jews are forbidden to save the lives of non-Jews in peacetime, they are also forbidden to murder them outright.
"As for gentiles with whom we are not at war, their death must not be caused, but it is forbidden to save them if they are at the point of death; if, for example, one of them is seen falling into the sea, he should not be rescued, for it is written. Neither shall thou stand against the blood of thy fellow, but a gentile is not your fellow."
Bluntly, anti-gentile codes are also proscribed against non-Jews living under Jewish (religious) rule. This covers the entire penal code. For example, there is an obvious discrimination against non-Jewish citizens in applying punishment for rape and adultery.
According to Israel Shahak's classical book "Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years," Halacha presumes that all gentiles are promiscuous and presumed not to have paternity."
For an example, a sexual intercourse between a gentile and a married Jewish woman is a capital offense for both parties, which is punishable by death for both.
However, a sexual intercourse between a Jewish male and a gentile woman — it does not matter if she is married or not since the concept of marriage doesn't apply to gentiles — is not viewed as gravely as the Talmud equates such intercourse with an intercourse with animals.
A Biblical verse states: "For she doted upon their paramours, whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horses." [King James Bible, the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel 23:20]. That verse is presumably applied to non-Jews"
In this case, death is proscribed for the gentile woman, while the Jew, even if it is a case of rape, is given a much lighter punishment, like flogging.
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1265890518301&pagename=Zone-English-Muslim_Affairs%2FMAELayout
From Inmate to Rights Defender
WASHINGTON – He was locked up in prison almost half his life, facing racism and discrimination if not for his skin color then for his Muslim religion.
But despite all that, Jihad Abdulmumit, now a community activist, motivational speaker and author, considers himself lucky.
Since his release, he has been making the full use of every single day.
"I see freedom differently," Jihad, 54, told IslamOnline.net.
"It is precious to have the free ability to express oneself in a healthy, wholesome, and beneficial way and to aspire to one’s own self-worth and greatness without hindrance, discrimination, oppression and retaliation."
In 1979, Jihad, who until then was David Bryant, was tried, convicted, and sentenced for over 23 years as a domestic political prisoner for his involvement in the Black Liberation Army and the Black Panther Party.
The two groups advocated taking up arms for the self-defense and liberation of blacks in the United States.
"The FBI did not view Blacks as terrorists, just ‘criminals,’" he recalled.
Within four months of his imprisonment and isolation, he found Islam.
"I was so inspired, relieved, and motivated to learn that God, Allah, was not a man, but the Creator of all things," Jihad described his feelings after joining his first Friday prayer.
"The brothers in the Muslim community in prison gave me the name ‘Jihad Daud Abdulmumit’ after I took my Shahadah (Muslims’ testimony to Islam).
They selected this name because I was a member of the Black Liberation Army, so I guess they figured ‘Jihad’ was appropriate."
Prison Racism
Jihad says one of the worst things about being in jail is the isolation inside a cell for days.
But probably more hurtful to him was the racism he faced, many times for being a black and sometimes for being a Muslim.
"The racism I encountered in prison tended more to be because I am black.
"Although a correctional officer or counselor may treat you the same as any other inmate, the racism is inherent."
But Jihad found in Islam the "shelter" that helped him during the hardest times of his life.
"Islam taught me that nothing happens without and beyond the will of Allah, so I accepted my prison experience with calmness and patience."
He notes that many Muslim prisoners had endured racial attitudes against them in a way that earned the respect of their jailers.
"Over time Muslims received respect from prison authorities that is because of the maturity of the brothers and their discipline, and to the moral conduct we have.
"Prison authorities could not ignore it."
For Prisoners Rights
Jihad says he learnt how to take the worst of his imprisonment and turn it to something positive.
"[Prison is] an oppressive tool of the State where you can either learn, grow, and transform into a better person, or be broken and deteriorate into a wretch."
Jihad started his activism work in jail, defending the rights of fellow Muslim prisoners.
"I was an active participant in the Muslim community and served as Imam for about ten of my 23 years at prison."
He participated in establishing several groups in prison to call for solidarity and justice for inmates.
"I worked with other Muslim, and non-Muslim, inmates to develop educational programs."
After being released, Jihad continued to advocate the rights of Muslim prisoners.
He has cooperated with organizations such as Jericho and the Muslim Alliance in North America (MANA) to defend the rights of all prisoners and to struggle in campaigns to free all political prisoners.
Residing in Richmond, Virginia, Jihad set up a free health clinic through which he arranges HIV/AIDS workshops for schools and prisons, and which he describes as "extremely successful in reaching prisoners of all races and cultures."
Now when he remembers his years in jail, Jihad feels empowered to face any hardships the future might bring.
"There is no guarantee that tomorrow I will not experience racism. I am sure that I am a victim of institutionalized racism because I am Black and Muslim like anyone else," he says with a smile.
"This is the contemporary challenge we face today.
"Even if someone may hate me, or my name, I demand that I be respected."
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1235339913459&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout
But despite all that, Jihad Abdulmumit, now a community activist, motivational speaker and author, considers himself lucky.
Since his release, he has been making the full use of every single day.
"I see freedom differently," Jihad, 54, told IslamOnline.net.
"It is precious to have the free ability to express oneself in a healthy, wholesome, and beneficial way and to aspire to one’s own self-worth and greatness without hindrance, discrimination, oppression and retaliation."
In 1979, Jihad, who until then was David Bryant, was tried, convicted, and sentenced for over 23 years as a domestic political prisoner for his involvement in the Black Liberation Army and the Black Panther Party.
The two groups advocated taking up arms for the self-defense and liberation of blacks in the United States.
"The FBI did not view Blacks as terrorists, just ‘criminals,’" he recalled.
Within four months of his imprisonment and isolation, he found Islam.
"I was so inspired, relieved, and motivated to learn that God, Allah, was not a man, but the Creator of all things," Jihad described his feelings after joining his first Friday prayer.
"The brothers in the Muslim community in prison gave me the name ‘Jihad Daud Abdulmumit’ after I took my Shahadah (Muslims’ testimony to Islam).
They selected this name because I was a member of the Black Liberation Army, so I guess they figured ‘Jihad’ was appropriate."
Prison Racism
Jihad says one of the worst things about being in jail is the isolation inside a cell for days.
But probably more hurtful to him was the racism he faced, many times for being a black and sometimes for being a Muslim.
"The racism I encountered in prison tended more to be because I am black.
"Although a correctional officer or counselor may treat you the same as any other inmate, the racism is inherent."
But Jihad found in Islam the "shelter" that helped him during the hardest times of his life.
"Islam taught me that nothing happens without and beyond the will of Allah, so I accepted my prison experience with calmness and patience."
He notes that many Muslim prisoners had endured racial attitudes against them in a way that earned the respect of their jailers.
"Over time Muslims received respect from prison authorities that is because of the maturity of the brothers and their discipline, and to the moral conduct we have.
"Prison authorities could not ignore it."
For Prisoners Rights
Jihad says he learnt how to take the worst of his imprisonment and turn it to something positive.
"[Prison is] an oppressive tool of the State where you can either learn, grow, and transform into a better person, or be broken and deteriorate into a wretch."
Jihad started his activism work in jail, defending the rights of fellow Muslim prisoners.
"I was an active participant in the Muslim community and served as Imam for about ten of my 23 years at prison."
He participated in establishing several groups in prison to call for solidarity and justice for inmates.
"I worked with other Muslim, and non-Muslim, inmates to develop educational programs."
After being released, Jihad continued to advocate the rights of Muslim prisoners.
He has cooperated with organizations such as Jericho and the Muslim Alliance in North America (MANA) to defend the rights of all prisoners and to struggle in campaigns to free all political prisoners.
Residing in Richmond, Virginia, Jihad set up a free health clinic through which he arranges HIV/AIDS workshops for schools and prisons, and which he describes as "extremely successful in reaching prisoners of all races and cultures."
Now when he remembers his years in jail, Jihad feels empowered to face any hardships the future might bring.
"There is no guarantee that tomorrow I will not experience racism. I am sure that I am a victim of institutionalized racism because I am Black and Muslim like anyone else," he says with a smile.
"This is the contemporary challenge we face today.
"Even if someone may hate me, or my name, I demand that I be respected."
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1235339913459&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout
Thursday, February 25, 2010
India needs 6,800 more hospitals, NRHM has many glitches: Survey
By IANS,
New Delhi: India needs over 6,800 more hospitals in rural areas to provide basic health facilities to people, the annual Economic Survey released Thursday said. The survey also said that several glitches in the flagship National Rural Health Mission needed to be ironed out to improve health infrastructure.
"There is still a shortage of 4,477 primary healthcare centres and 2,337 community healthcare centres as per the 2001 population norms," the survey said.
This means the requirement for hospitals will be much more if the population figure in 2010 is taken into account.
The annual survey presented in parliament said: "Almost 29 percent of the existing health infrastructure is in rented buildings. Poor upkeep and maintenance, and high absenteeism of manpower in the rural areas are the main problems in the health delivery system."
It said NRHM is trying to address all these problems but needs to iron out several glitches to implement the scheme which has been in operation since 2005.
The survey also said that through the mission, the government aimed at bettering the health infrastructure vis-a-vis population, but the "ratio of population to health centres remained low with the targeted number of new health centres not being established".
"Basic facilities were still absent in many health centres with many PHCs (primary health centres) and CHCs (community health centres) being unable to provide guaranteed service such as in-patient services, operation theatres, labour rooms, pathological tests, X-ray facilities and emergency care."
The survey said: "An assessment of the health related indicators would suggest that significant gains have been made over the years. However, India fares poorly in most of the indicators in comparison with developing countries like China and Sri Lanka.
"The progress in health has been quite uneven, across regions, gender, as well as space."
Underlining some NRHM shortcomings that have also been pointed out by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), the survey said: "Release of funds to state health societies and consequently to district and block levels require further streamlining to ensure prompt and effective utilisation of funds".
The survey said: "Village level health and sanitation committees were still to be constituted in nine states".
It also said that in nine states, the stock of contraceptives and other medicines as mandated by the NRHM was not found and there was a shortage of service providers at different levels.
The survey also said that efforts are on to better the indicator and the infant mortality rate is expected to reach 30 per every 100,000 live births against the current level of 53 by 2012.
http://twocircles.net/2010feb25/indi...es_survey.html
New Delhi: India needs over 6,800 more hospitals in rural areas to provide basic health facilities to people, the annual Economic Survey released Thursday said. The survey also said that several glitches in the flagship National Rural Health Mission needed to be ironed out to improve health infrastructure.
"There is still a shortage of 4,477 primary healthcare centres and 2,337 community healthcare centres as per the 2001 population norms," the survey said.
This means the requirement for hospitals will be much more if the population figure in 2010 is taken into account.
The annual survey presented in parliament said: "Almost 29 percent of the existing health infrastructure is in rented buildings. Poor upkeep and maintenance, and high absenteeism of manpower in the rural areas are the main problems in the health delivery system."
It said NRHM is trying to address all these problems but needs to iron out several glitches to implement the scheme which has been in operation since 2005.
The survey also said that through the mission, the government aimed at bettering the health infrastructure vis-a-vis population, but the "ratio of population to health centres remained low with the targeted number of new health centres not being established".
"Basic facilities were still absent in many health centres with many PHCs (primary health centres) and CHCs (community health centres) being unable to provide guaranteed service such as in-patient services, operation theatres, labour rooms, pathological tests, X-ray facilities and emergency care."
The survey said: "An assessment of the health related indicators would suggest that significant gains have been made over the years. However, India fares poorly in most of the indicators in comparison with developing countries like China and Sri Lanka.
"The progress in health has been quite uneven, across regions, gender, as well as space."
Underlining some NRHM shortcomings that have also been pointed out by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), the survey said: "Release of funds to state health societies and consequently to district and block levels require further streamlining to ensure prompt and effective utilisation of funds".
The survey said: "Village level health and sanitation committees were still to be constituted in nine states".
It also said that in nine states, the stock of contraceptives and other medicines as mandated by the NRHM was not found and there was a shortage of service providers at different levels.
The survey also said that efforts are on to better the indicator and the infant mortality rate is expected to reach 30 per every 100,000 live births against the current level of 53 by 2012.
http://twocircles.net/2010feb25/indi...es_survey.html
Dubai police identify more Hamas suspects
By IANS/AKI,
Dubai : Police claim to have identified 15 more suspects involved in the assassination of a Hamas leader at a Dubai hotel in January.
Wednesday's announcement brings the total number of people allegedly involved in the murder of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh to 26.
Eight members of the group allegedly flew to Dubai via the Italian cities of Rome and Milan, according to the Arab network, 'al-Arabiya', even though they did not travel on Italian passports.
One of the founders of Hamas's military wing, the Izz al-Din Qassam Brigades, Mabhouh was found dead in his hotel room Jan 20.
The assassination, allegedly carried out by people who used fraudulent passports to enter the UAE, has been blamed on the Israeli spy agency, Mossad, and provoked an international furore.
Dubai police have produced a chart tracing the travel routes of both the new and old suspects before and after Mabhouh's death.
"The suspects gathered in Dubai and dispersed to various locations before pairing up again in different teams and heading off to other destinations," police said.
The latest list included for the first time three passports attributed to Australian citizens.
The total number of passports allegedly connected to the murder include 12 British, six Irish, three French, three Australian and one German.
Interpol still has a Red Notice in place demanding international assistance to identify the attackers.
http://twocircles.net/2010feb25/duba..._suspects.html
Dubai : Police claim to have identified 15 more suspects involved in the assassination of a Hamas leader at a Dubai hotel in January.
Wednesday's announcement brings the total number of people allegedly involved in the murder of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh to 26.
Eight members of the group allegedly flew to Dubai via the Italian cities of Rome and Milan, according to the Arab network, 'al-Arabiya', even though they did not travel on Italian passports.
One of the founders of Hamas's military wing, the Izz al-Din Qassam Brigades, Mabhouh was found dead in his hotel room Jan 20.
The assassination, allegedly carried out by people who used fraudulent passports to enter the UAE, has been blamed on the Israeli spy agency, Mossad, and provoked an international furore.
Dubai police have produced a chart tracing the travel routes of both the new and old suspects before and after Mabhouh's death.
"The suspects gathered in Dubai and dispersed to various locations before pairing up again in different teams and heading off to other destinations," police said.
The latest list included for the first time three passports attributed to Australian citizens.
The total number of passports allegedly connected to the murder include 12 British, six Irish, three French, three Australian and one German.
Interpol still has a Red Notice in place demanding international assistance to identify the attackers.
http://twocircles.net/2010feb25/duba..._suspects.html
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
America's First Muslim College
By Dilshad D. Ali, IOL Correspondent
WASHINGTON – As interested students race to beat the fast approaching enrolment deadline, Muslims are turning their sights to the Zaytuna College in California to see if America's first ever Muslim college will live up to the high expectations.
"We’ve been waiting for this time," Imam Zaid Shakir, a scholar-in-residence and lecturer at Zaytuna Institute and a co-founded of the college, told IslamOnline.net in an exclusive interview.
"It’s been a long road to get here, Alhamdulillah, and to know that we’re in this final part to getting freshman class set is very exciting."
Zaytuna College, a brainchild of Sheikh Hamza Yusuf, Imam Shakir and Professor Hatem Bazian, will stop accepting applications for its first freshman class of 2010 on March 1.
With the application process coming to a close, a committee is readying to study the applications and admit between 20-25 students as incoming freshmen.
And although the college is seeking Muslim students, it is not exclusive to Muslims.
There will be no gender separation at the college and academic pursuits and freedom will be paramount.
Course subjects have been decided on, but educators are now writing syllabi and mapping out teaching methodology for the subjects.
Currently only two majors are being offered: Arabic language and Islamic law and theology.
As the class size increases and more educators are hired, other majors will be offered, Imam Shakir said.
Zaytuna College is in the rigorous process of seeking accreditation from the Western Association of Schools and Colleges, a process that will take a number of years and one that Imam Shakir hopes will be completed by the time the freshman class graduates.
He noted that they have been able to achieve the goal of raising nearly $4 million needed for its temporary location at Berkeley.
Now they face the challenge of raising upwards of $65 million for an endowment fund that will ensure a consistent monetary support and alleviate the need for constant fundraising.
Along with that comes a move in the near future to a permanent location in Northern California.
Where America Meets Islam
Imam Shakir, along with other Zaytuna College advisors, criss-crossed the country to drum up support, raise funds and answer questions from perspective students and their parents.
He also held a series of weekly informational online seminars explaining the unique nature of the college, which aims to meld two types of learning institution: a college focusing on religious study and one where such study will be explored in the context of a liberal arts education.
"It’s the first time something like this is being attempted in this country," said Bazian, a professor at the University of California-Berkeley and at St. Mary’s College of California.
"Years ago when we discussed the need for an accredited Muslim college in the US, we knew that we needed one where students learn about the Islamic faith but also how Islam works into the American fabric and into various liberal arts subjects—sociology, anthropology, history, philosophy."
For example, says Imam Shakir, in a philosophy class students will study Descartes but also spend a lot of time on Al-Ghazali.
"We want to teach the fundamentals of Islam—Shariah, history, Arabic, Qur’an—but we want to bring it into the context of an American education, how these branches of Islam work in the context of other educational subjects."
One of the goals of the college is to produce scholars of Islam who are a product of an American education system.
One of the main obstacles to the rise of Islam in the US has been that the majority of educators and mosque leaders are educated overseas.
"The wonderful scholars we have in the US get their Islamic foundation from universities in Egypt, Turkey, and other countries," notes Bazian.
"But we have not been able to produce scholars who received their education here in the US and who can truly understand and address the questions and concerns of the Muslim-American population."
Bazian asserts that Zaytuna College graduate could become imams at mosques and directors of Islamic community centers.
Imam Shakir explains that another important goal of the college is to provide a sound liberal arts education grounded by Islamic studies that can then be a jumping-off point to any advanced degrees in law, business, medicine and other subjects.
Omar A. Ansari says if he were 18 again, he would apply to Zaytuna College.
"I think a B.A. from Zaytuna would be a great foundation upon which to build further, even if one intends to do law, medicine, etc," he told IOL.
"I am looking forward to the day when the college allows its classes to be audited, inshallah."
Mona El-Bashir, a high school student in Virginia, she has been following the development of the Zaytuna College and is excited to see it opening in 2010.
"I am thinking about applying for 2011," she told IOL.
"I will have to convince my parents that it is a worthy enough education for me to travel all the way to the West Coast."
WASHINGTON – As interested students race to beat the fast approaching enrolment deadline, Muslims are turning their sights to the Zaytuna College in California to see if America's first ever Muslim college will live up to the high expectations.
"We’ve been waiting for this time," Imam Zaid Shakir, a scholar-in-residence and lecturer at Zaytuna Institute and a co-founded of the college, told IslamOnline.net in an exclusive interview.
"It’s been a long road to get here, Alhamdulillah, and to know that we’re in this final part to getting freshman class set is very exciting."
Zaytuna College, a brainchild of Sheikh Hamza Yusuf, Imam Shakir and Professor Hatem Bazian, will stop accepting applications for its first freshman class of 2010 on March 1.
With the application process coming to a close, a committee is readying to study the applications and admit between 20-25 students as incoming freshmen.
And although the college is seeking Muslim students, it is not exclusive to Muslims.
There will be no gender separation at the college and academic pursuits and freedom will be paramount.
Course subjects have been decided on, but educators are now writing syllabi and mapping out teaching methodology for the subjects.
Currently only two majors are being offered: Arabic language and Islamic law and theology.
As the class size increases and more educators are hired, other majors will be offered, Imam Shakir said.
Zaytuna College is in the rigorous process of seeking accreditation from the Western Association of Schools and Colleges, a process that will take a number of years and one that Imam Shakir hopes will be completed by the time the freshman class graduates.
He noted that they have been able to achieve the goal of raising nearly $4 million needed for its temporary location at Berkeley.
Now they face the challenge of raising upwards of $65 million for an endowment fund that will ensure a consistent monetary support and alleviate the need for constant fundraising.
Along with that comes a move in the near future to a permanent location in Northern California.
Where America Meets Islam
Imam Shakir, along with other Zaytuna College advisors, criss-crossed the country to drum up support, raise funds and answer questions from perspective students and their parents.
He also held a series of weekly informational online seminars explaining the unique nature of the college, which aims to meld two types of learning institution: a college focusing on religious study and one where such study will be explored in the context of a liberal arts education.
"It’s the first time something like this is being attempted in this country," said Bazian, a professor at the University of California-Berkeley and at St. Mary’s College of California.
"Years ago when we discussed the need for an accredited Muslim college in the US, we knew that we needed one where students learn about the Islamic faith but also how Islam works into the American fabric and into various liberal arts subjects—sociology, anthropology, history, philosophy."
For example, says Imam Shakir, in a philosophy class students will study Descartes but also spend a lot of time on Al-Ghazali.
"We want to teach the fundamentals of Islam—Shariah, history, Arabic, Qur’an—but we want to bring it into the context of an American education, how these branches of Islam work in the context of other educational subjects."
One of the goals of the college is to produce scholars of Islam who are a product of an American education system.
One of the main obstacles to the rise of Islam in the US has been that the majority of educators and mosque leaders are educated overseas.
"The wonderful scholars we have in the US get their Islamic foundation from universities in Egypt, Turkey, and other countries," notes Bazian.
"But we have not been able to produce scholars who received their education here in the US and who can truly understand and address the questions and concerns of the Muslim-American population."
Bazian asserts that Zaytuna College graduate could become imams at mosques and directors of Islamic community centers.
Imam Shakir explains that another important goal of the college is to provide a sound liberal arts education grounded by Islamic studies that can then be a jumping-off point to any advanced degrees in law, business, medicine and other subjects.
Omar A. Ansari says if he were 18 again, he would apply to Zaytuna College.
"I think a B.A. from Zaytuna would be a great foundation upon which to build further, even if one intends to do law, medicine, etc," he told IOL.
"I am looking forward to the day when the college allows its classes to be audited, inshallah."
Mona El-Bashir, a high school student in Virginia, she has been following the development of the Zaytuna College and is excited to see it opening in 2010.
"I am thinking about applying for 2011," she told IOL.
"I will have to convince my parents that it is a worthy enough education for me to travel all the way to the West Coast."
Islam in Bosnia: an interview with Armina Omerika
By Claudia Mende
Islam has been practiced in Bosnia for centuries. Freelance writer Claudia Mende asks Armina Omerika, an expert in Islamic studies at the University of Erfurt in Germany, whether the Bosnian Islamic tradition could serve as a model for the integration of Muslims in other European societies.
How has Bosnian Islam come to terms with the non-Muslim Bosnian state?
Armina Omerika: This question arose for the first time in 1878, when Bosnia came under Austro-Hungarian rule. One could say that Bosnian Muslims have been living under "foreign rule" ever since. Even then, there were heated debates as to whether Muslims could live in a non-Islamic state. Reformers like Dzemaludin Causevic, leader of Bosnian Muslims from 1914 to 1930, were in favour of a modus vivendi [a temporary agreement between disputing parties allowing for peaceful coexistence until a formal settlement can be reached]. Naturally, this modus vivendi has changed through the years.
What issues were particularly controversial?
Omerika: There were fierce debates between Muslim intellectuals and scholars about the secularisation of education, the status of women in society and the reform of Islamic law. Since the Austro-Hungarian occupation, Islamic law has been restricted to family and inheritance laws.
One particularly controversial issue was the extent to which women could operate in public. The question of Islamic banks and interest rates was also discussed, as was the way in which the community should come to terms with non-Islamic administrative structures and systems of rule. Many areas of life were secularised - bit-by-bit. However, the impetus to reform Islamic law and to secularise society also came from within the Bosnian Muslim community, not from outside.
Havadže Duraka's Mosque in Sarajevo [Photo by Steve Calcott]
In other words, nothing can be achieved by applying pressure from the outside alone?
Omerika: Nothing much can be achieved without an intra-Muslim debate. In Europe in particular, Muslim communities are very diverse. They frequently disagree with one another and are poorly linked. Dialogue within the Muslim community is the first prerequisite for solving integration problems in European societies.
What was the situation during the period of Communist rule?
Omerika: Secularisation in Bosnia peaked during the period of Communist rule [beginning in the 1940s]. Although the roots of secularisation reach back to Muslim groups and debates in the early 20th century, the Communists enforced secularisation from above and coupled it with repressive measures against the Muslim community. Secularisation was implemented in a way that is out of the question for contemporary democratic states.
Did this forced secularisation lead to a religious revival?
Omerika: From the mid-1960s onwards, there was a phase of liberalisation and a hint of religious freedom, which led to a religious revival. Semi-legal movements and informal networks that had continued to exist underground were now able to speak out in the Communist state.
Is there an overlap between Islam and Bosnian nationalism?
Omerika: Ever since the Bosnian War [from 1992 to 1995], the Muslim community has supported a form of political nationalism in which ethnic national identity is equated with religious and political identity. Accordingly, alliances are repeatedly formed between the Muslim community and the various Bosniak (i.e. Bosnian Muslim) parties in Bosnia and Herzegovina that have a nationalist outlook.
Muslim communities in Western Europe, on the other hand, are made up largely of Muslims who have migrated there since the 1950s. Since then, Muslim life of an unprecedented diversity has developed. This diversity is not only of an ethnic, but also of a theological nature. There are linguistic, ethnic and doctrinal barriers amongst the Muslims of Western Europe which make it impossible to transfer aspects of Bosnia's Muslim community to other regions of Europe.
And what about the theological aspects? Could they act as a model?
Omerika: In Bosnia, the tradition of open Muslim discourse is as old as the Muslim community itself. While there are conservative currents, they are part of an ongoing debate.
A milestone in Bosnian Islam was the re-establishment of the Faculty of Islamic Studies in Sarajevo in 1977. Islamic scholars such as Enes Karic and Fikret Karcic, who work at Europe's only Muslim faculty at a state university, have developed groundbreaking concepts for the integration of Islam into a secular state.
Is the status of Islam a topical issue in Bosnia?
Omerika: Mufti Mustafa Ceric is particularly controversial. Many accuse him of positioning himself as a political player and overstepping the bounds of his role as a religious leader. They also say that he is mixing Islam and politics and poses a threat to the secular character of the state.
In addition, Salafism [a conservative Sunni movement originating in Saudi Arabia] and its missionary efforts are a regular theme in the Bosnian press. In contrast, hardly anything is said about conservative Christians from the United States acting as missionaries to Muslim, Catholic and Orthodox youth. The same holds true for the close ties between the Serbian Orthodox Church and the state structures. The debate about Islam and its role in society has become a kind of ersatz discourse for debates about religion in general.
---
Claudia Mende is a freelance writer. Armina Omerika is Assistant Professor at the University of Erfurt, Germany. This abridged article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) with permission from Qantara.de. The full text can be found at www.qantara.de.
Islam has been practiced in Bosnia for centuries. Freelance writer Claudia Mende asks Armina Omerika, an expert in Islamic studies at the University of Erfurt in Germany, whether the Bosnian Islamic tradition could serve as a model for the integration of Muslims in other European societies.
How has Bosnian Islam come to terms with the non-Muslim Bosnian state?
Armina Omerika: This question arose for the first time in 1878, when Bosnia came under Austro-Hungarian rule. One could say that Bosnian Muslims have been living under "foreign rule" ever since. Even then, there were heated debates as to whether Muslims could live in a non-Islamic state. Reformers like Dzemaludin Causevic, leader of Bosnian Muslims from 1914 to 1930, were in favour of a modus vivendi [a temporary agreement between disputing parties allowing for peaceful coexistence until a formal settlement can be reached]. Naturally, this modus vivendi has changed through the years.
What issues were particularly controversial?
Omerika: There were fierce debates between Muslim intellectuals and scholars about the secularisation of education, the status of women in society and the reform of Islamic law. Since the Austro-Hungarian occupation, Islamic law has been restricted to family and inheritance laws.
One particularly controversial issue was the extent to which women could operate in public. The question of Islamic banks and interest rates was also discussed, as was the way in which the community should come to terms with non-Islamic administrative structures and systems of rule. Many areas of life were secularised - bit-by-bit. However, the impetus to reform Islamic law and to secularise society also came from within the Bosnian Muslim community, not from outside.
Havadže Duraka's Mosque in Sarajevo [Photo by Steve Calcott]
In other words, nothing can be achieved by applying pressure from the outside alone?
Omerika: Nothing much can be achieved without an intra-Muslim debate. In Europe in particular, Muslim communities are very diverse. They frequently disagree with one another and are poorly linked. Dialogue within the Muslim community is the first prerequisite for solving integration problems in European societies.
What was the situation during the period of Communist rule?
Omerika: Secularisation in Bosnia peaked during the period of Communist rule [beginning in the 1940s]. Although the roots of secularisation reach back to Muslim groups and debates in the early 20th century, the Communists enforced secularisation from above and coupled it with repressive measures against the Muslim community. Secularisation was implemented in a way that is out of the question for contemporary democratic states.
Did this forced secularisation lead to a religious revival?
Omerika: From the mid-1960s onwards, there was a phase of liberalisation and a hint of religious freedom, which led to a religious revival. Semi-legal movements and informal networks that had continued to exist underground were now able to speak out in the Communist state.
Is there an overlap between Islam and Bosnian nationalism?
Omerika: Ever since the Bosnian War [from 1992 to 1995], the Muslim community has supported a form of political nationalism in which ethnic national identity is equated with religious and political identity. Accordingly, alliances are repeatedly formed between the Muslim community and the various Bosniak (i.e. Bosnian Muslim) parties in Bosnia and Herzegovina that have a nationalist outlook.
Muslim communities in Western Europe, on the other hand, are made up largely of Muslims who have migrated there since the 1950s. Since then, Muslim life of an unprecedented diversity has developed. This diversity is not only of an ethnic, but also of a theological nature. There are linguistic, ethnic and doctrinal barriers amongst the Muslims of Western Europe which make it impossible to transfer aspects of Bosnia's Muslim community to other regions of Europe.
And what about the theological aspects? Could they act as a model?
Omerika: In Bosnia, the tradition of open Muslim discourse is as old as the Muslim community itself. While there are conservative currents, they are part of an ongoing debate.
A milestone in Bosnian Islam was the re-establishment of the Faculty of Islamic Studies in Sarajevo in 1977. Islamic scholars such as Enes Karic and Fikret Karcic, who work at Europe's only Muslim faculty at a state university, have developed groundbreaking concepts for the integration of Islam into a secular state.
Is the status of Islam a topical issue in Bosnia?
Omerika: Mufti Mustafa Ceric is particularly controversial. Many accuse him of positioning himself as a political player and overstepping the bounds of his role as a religious leader. They also say that he is mixing Islam and politics and poses a threat to the secular character of the state.
In addition, Salafism [a conservative Sunni movement originating in Saudi Arabia] and its missionary efforts are a regular theme in the Bosnian press. In contrast, hardly anything is said about conservative Christians from the United States acting as missionaries to Muslim, Catholic and Orthodox youth. The same holds true for the close ties between the Serbian Orthodox Church and the state structures. The debate about Islam and its role in society has become a kind of ersatz discourse for debates about religion in general.
---
Claudia Mende is a freelance writer. Armina Omerika is Assistant Professor at the University of Erfurt, Germany. This abridged article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) with permission from Qantara.de. The full text can be found at www.qantara.de.
Monday, February 22, 2010
India: Short on secularism
Frontline, Feb. 13-26, 2010
by K.N.PANIKKAR
The impact of growing religiosity and the inadequacy of secular practices demand close attention in assessing the state of secularism in India.
AFP/FILES
Gandhiji at Delhi’s Purana Qila where Muslim refugees prepare to depart for Pakistan, on September 22, 1947. His assassination by a Hindu fanatic was a setback to secularism.
SECULAR India has undergone several convulsions during the past 60 years, so much so that doubts about its survival were entertained by many. Some of them tend to relate these convulsions to the nature of Indian society, to which they attribute centrality to religion in both personal and public affairs. In such a society, it has been argued, secularism can only have a perilous existence, that too by compromising some of its basic tenets. This view has received academic respectability and political support: the former from those who had no faith in the ability of Indian society for institution building and the latter from those who were inimical to secularism as a political creed.
The scepticism about secularism has only increased in recent times. The defenders of secularism are shrinking and some of them are exploring conditions beyond secularism. The weaknesses of secular practices add fuel to the fire: they confirm the doubts about the relevance of secularism in Indian conditions. At the same time, the unprecedented popularity that religiosity has gained has pushed secularism to the backyard. In assessing the state of secularism today, the impact of growing religiosity as well as the inadequacy of secular practices demand close attention.
Concept of Secularism
All debates about secularism in India occur in the context of the European experience. The church-state relationship, which was central to the development of secularism in Europe, is the starting point of all discussions, both by supporters and by critics of secularism. For the consideration of the Indian situation it is a red herring. What is important in India is not church-state dynamics but state-society relationship and, more specifically, being a multireligious society, relations within society.
The Indian notion of secularism, based on uniform respect for all religions by the state and divorce of religion from public institutional practices, was evolved in the context of this Indian social reality. The obsession with the European experience overlooks the historicity of the Indian phenomenon. The process of secularisation is not necessarily similar in all societies. But all societies, including India, have undergone the process of secularisation at the onset of modernity. The European experience is important, as it was the earliest manifestation, but it does not connote that what happened in other societies is its mirror image.
When this process began in India would be difficult to locate with certainty, but the historical antecedents in which the process is rooted can be traced to fairly early times, possibly to the period of the Buddha. Let it not be misunderstood that what is suggested is that secularism existed at the time of the Buddha, but that Buddhism and the Bhakti movement and other churnings within different religions, being critiques of the then existing religious practices, created the space for secularism to emerge at a later time. Its modern form, however, found articulation and momentum during the course of the 19th century when humanism, rationalism and religious universalism provided the intellectual base for a secular discourse. The Indian Constitution internalised the logic of this discourse to shape it as secular in practice, although the concept of secularism was neither included nor elaborated in the Constitution until a later date. What imparted this character to the Constitution was, at least partly, the historical experience of Indian society.
Whether this concept – popularly described as sarva dharma samabhava – was adequate to ensure a secular state has been a subject of considerable debate. The equal attitude towards all religions does not make the state secular; on the other hand it might implicate the state in religious matters. This fear is not misplaced, as during the past 60 years, in the name of impartiality, the state had to associate itself with almost all religions. The consequence was not the equidistance of the state from all religions, but the involvement of the state in the concerns of all religions. Moreover, the state succumbed to the pressures of all religions. Therefore, instead of being secular the state and its apparatuses were mired in religious matters. Jawaharlal Nehru tried to resist this deviation and kept aloof from participating in religious ceremonies. The then President, Rajendra Prasad, did not uphold that principle and attended the consecration of the newly constructed Somnath temple, to the great chagrin of the Prime Minister. Nehru’s legacy was also not owned by his successors, who in their quest for electoral support compromised the state with the demands of religious leaders. The worst phase was the period of the Ram Janmabhoomi dispute when the Prime Minister appeared to bend over backwards to appease religious leaders. Unless the state remains secular, society can never preserve its secular character. With the decline in the commitment of the state to secularism during the post-Nehru era, secular space in society became progressively smaller, which was eventually colonised by communalism.
Impact of Communalism
What affected the secular character of Indian society most decisively was the intervention of Hindu communalism, which has a long history dating to the 18th century even though riots became frequent only during colonial rule. By the 20th century, communalism had made inroads among both Hindus and Muslims, considerably undermining the secular ethos in society and, finally, leading to Partition. The assassination of Mahatma Gandhij by a Hindu fanatic was a severe setback to secularism. After this Hindu communal organisations were rather dormant, which, however, did not mean they were inactive. The Gandhi assassination did not dampen their spirits, and under the leadership of the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) they soon regrouped and reinvigorated their cultural work and physical training.
The communal organisations were aware that communalism could thrive only by undermining secular consciousness. As a result, the main thrust of the communal agenda was to eliminate the fairly powerful secular hegemony present in most domains. The communal attack on secularism was, therefore, intended to delegitimise it, accusing it of being an alien ideology without roots in Indian soil. Moreover, secular activists were physically intimidated and secular artists and intellectuals were defamed. The purpose was to ensure that the public prestige and acceptability that secularism enjoyed was tarnished so that communalism could occupy the secular space. The campaign was not without any impact. In the face of communal aggression, secularism considerably lost out politically in the 1990s. Martha Nusbawm, an American scholar, observed that during this period India slipped into religious terrorism but managed to slip out of it. This ‘escape’ from the possible continued communal subjection was mainly, though not exclusively, because of the strength of its secular tradition.
Secularism and Communal Harmony
Secularism in India is used as a synonym for communal harmony and religious togetherness. For long, Indian society had a reputation for collaboration and accommodation. The history of India bears testimony to this social condition in which Indians lived for centuries.
They not only shared material resources, but often worshipped the same deity. Hindus and Muslims contributing to the maintenance of each other’s shrines is a fairly widespread phenomenon. In a village in Marathwada where there are no Muslims, the Dargah of a Sufi saint is maintained by Hindus. At Bababudangiri in Karnataka, both Hindus and Muslims worshipped the same saint under different names. The now-popular Hindu shrine of Sabarimala in Kerala has a Muslim ‘deity’ whom all devotees of the Hindu god invariably worship. Although Hindus have now appropriated the Sai Baba of Shirdi, nobody is sure whether he was a Hindu or a Muslim. This mutual relationship is based not on tolerance but on respect for and belief in each other’s faith. Such practices and perspectives were shared by the high and the low – from the rulers to the peasants in the villages.
Communal harmony, however, is not secularism; communal harmony can only be an outcome of secularism, which is a condition in which religion, like any other faith, is a purely personal affair of the individual. It should not intervene in interpersonal relationships or institutional functioning. If secularism is to be a reality, therefore, it is not sufficient to have a secular state, there must also be a secular society. If the society is not secular the state is likely to depart from secular principles, as happened on several occasions during the past 60 years.
The greatest success of communalism has been to vitiate human interpersonal relations in society into a religious relationship, which affected the secular ethos adversely. Social relations thus came to be guided not by secular considerations but by religious identity. The 60 years of experience indicates that the secular character of the Indian state and society has declined steadily.
Religionisation and Secularism
A major and discernible change during the past 60 years has been the rapid religionisation of society. Traditionally, religious rituals were confined to temples, where devotees congregated, or to homes, in which family members participated. Religion is now out in the open, with religious celebrations being conducted in public places and religious processions of all communities crowding the roads with music and fanfare. The improvement in technology has facilitated pilgrimages, and a secular enterprise like tourism has come to be linked with places of religious worship. The resulting commodification of religion is a spectacular change, which has led to the growth of pilgrimage tourism as an industry. As a result, the popular aphorism that India is a religious country does not need much convincing, particularly with the proliferation of meditation centres and godmen. The places of worship have not lagged behind; in fact, the increase in their number is phenomenal. The most saleable commodity in India today is religion.
It is arguable that belief in religion is not antithetical to secularism, if the character of secularism in a multireligious society is essentially communal harmony. It is a common argument that all true believers are secular in outlook and hence do not entertain animosity towards the followers of other religions. This may as well be true. But secularism is not communal harmony; communal harmony is the outcome of secularism. It is, therefore, imperative to explore what constitutes secularism as an ideology beyond harmony.
The real foundation of secularism is poised on a triad consisting of humanism, rationality and universalism. Most religions propound humanism and universalism, but rationality is alien to religion because the essential features of religion are based on faith. Moreover, rituals and superstition derive their legitimacy from religion, and division between religions is marked by religiosity. As a result, religiosity acts as an impediment to secular practice.
A weakness of Indian secularism is that its goal is limited to communal harmony. Even Gandhiji, perhaps the most committed exponent of harmony, could not succeed in his life mission of Hindu-Muslim unity because his passionate efforts were not backed by a secular foundation in society. Given this historical experience, secularism had to be reinvented in post-Independence India. The possible prescription was a creative combination of the Nehruvian notion of a secular state and the Gandhian idea of social togetherness. Unfortunately, the state increasingly lost its secular character and community relationship slipped steadily into religious antagonism, the sad consequences of which were witnessed in Gujarat and Orissa.
Deviations from Secularism
Despite limitations and departures, the post-Independence Indian state maintained a modicum of secular character, although for electoral reasons the state made several deviations from the ideal, particularly during the rule of Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi. The secular character of the state suffered most grievously during the six years when the Bhartiya Janata Party had control over the state apparatuses. The interventions of the state, particularly in education, culture and police administration, were palpably anti-secular. Under its administration the Indian state assumed a distinctly Hindu communal character and used the opportunity to undo the secular traditions of Indian society.
The unfortunate fact is that the ‘secular’ rule that followed has not been able to erase this scar. Moreover, in many of its actions the state continues to carry the anti-secular baggage. Is it not because of that that a Bill for the prevention of communal riots has not been passed? Is it not for the same reason that the recommendations of the Sachar Committee have been kept in cold storage? Or that no action has been taken so far against those who have been indicted by the Liberhan Commission for the Babri Masjid’s demolition after 16 years of its labour?
The more abiding impact of Hindu communal activities has been on undermining the harmonious social relations that existed among different communities. This was attempted through a variety of ways, among them, through communal politics, hate campaigns, falsification of history and instigation of communal riots. Violence is the chief instrument of communalism, which spreads hatred, fear, ghettoisation, and so on, and communal violence is not an end in itself but the beginning of further rift between communities, undermining thereby the existing secular relations.
During the past 60 years, the activities of communal organisations have been such that Indian society has been ideologically and socially communalised. Moreover, communalism has made society brutal; brutality of the kind perpetrated in Gujarat and Orissa was unknown in the past despite communal riots occurring rather regularly.
The communal advance witnessed during the past 60 years is at the expense of secular space. That space has to be reclaimed if India is to remain a democratic society. Being a multireligious and multicultural society, democracy cannot survive in India without secularism. Are there efforts afoot, both by the state and by civil society, to further the process of secularisation?
After the defeat of communal forces in the general elections of 2004, secularism appears to have been put on the back burner both by the secular parties and by civil society organisations. Understandably because there was a sense of relief that the threat had been warded off. The general elections of 2009 gave enough reason for further complacency because communal forces were worsted in them. But secularism does not come to stay because of successes in an election or two. It has to be assiduously constructed through sustained work; continuity is the key to the creation of social consciousness. The secular forces hardly realise this fundamental factor, but believe that secularism can be fought and won in the political arena.
One of the main reasons for the success of Hindu communalism has been the failure of secularism to intervene effectively in the social and cultural domains, in which communalism is ever active. But secularism is as much a cultural and social phenomenon as a political one. The secular forces have not evolved an agenda based on such an understanding. At the same time, anti-secular forces attribute great importance to the non-political sector.
The agenda of secular forces has neither been innovative nor culturally sensitive to evolve an idiom to communicate with the masses. Much of the secular activity does not go beyond press statements by intellectuals and seminars in which committed secularists alone participate. There is hardly any attempt from secular intellectuals to reclaim popular cultural consciousness. The accusation that the secular intellectuals and cultural activists circulate alien ideas among themselves appears to stick, even if it is not entirely true.
If secularism is to be a force in society, it has to reinvent itself in cultural and social terms. Then and then alone it will be a part of the ideology of the masses. The Hindu and Muslim villagers in Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan who greet each other with Ram Ram have their own notion of secular interpersonal relations, despite being believers of different religions. Secularism has to internalise the culture of this social relation if it aims to be a hegemonic force in society.
K.N. Panikkar is former professor of Modern Indian History at JNU and currently Vice-Chairman of the Kerala State Higher Education Council. E-mail: knpanikkar(at)gmail.com
by K.N.PANIKKAR
The impact of growing religiosity and the inadequacy of secular practices demand close attention in assessing the state of secularism in India.
AFP/FILES
Gandhiji at Delhi’s Purana Qila where Muslim refugees prepare to depart for Pakistan, on September 22, 1947. His assassination by a Hindu fanatic was a setback to secularism.
SECULAR India has undergone several convulsions during the past 60 years, so much so that doubts about its survival were entertained by many. Some of them tend to relate these convulsions to the nature of Indian society, to which they attribute centrality to religion in both personal and public affairs. In such a society, it has been argued, secularism can only have a perilous existence, that too by compromising some of its basic tenets. This view has received academic respectability and political support: the former from those who had no faith in the ability of Indian society for institution building and the latter from those who were inimical to secularism as a political creed.
The scepticism about secularism has only increased in recent times. The defenders of secularism are shrinking and some of them are exploring conditions beyond secularism. The weaknesses of secular practices add fuel to the fire: they confirm the doubts about the relevance of secularism in Indian conditions. At the same time, the unprecedented popularity that religiosity has gained has pushed secularism to the backyard. In assessing the state of secularism today, the impact of growing religiosity as well as the inadequacy of secular practices demand close attention.
Concept of Secularism
All debates about secularism in India occur in the context of the European experience. The church-state relationship, which was central to the development of secularism in Europe, is the starting point of all discussions, both by supporters and by critics of secularism. For the consideration of the Indian situation it is a red herring. What is important in India is not church-state dynamics but state-society relationship and, more specifically, being a multireligious society, relations within society.
The Indian notion of secularism, based on uniform respect for all religions by the state and divorce of religion from public institutional practices, was evolved in the context of this Indian social reality. The obsession with the European experience overlooks the historicity of the Indian phenomenon. The process of secularisation is not necessarily similar in all societies. But all societies, including India, have undergone the process of secularisation at the onset of modernity. The European experience is important, as it was the earliest manifestation, but it does not connote that what happened in other societies is its mirror image.
When this process began in India would be difficult to locate with certainty, but the historical antecedents in which the process is rooted can be traced to fairly early times, possibly to the period of the Buddha. Let it not be misunderstood that what is suggested is that secularism existed at the time of the Buddha, but that Buddhism and the Bhakti movement and other churnings within different religions, being critiques of the then existing religious practices, created the space for secularism to emerge at a later time. Its modern form, however, found articulation and momentum during the course of the 19th century when humanism, rationalism and religious universalism provided the intellectual base for a secular discourse. The Indian Constitution internalised the logic of this discourse to shape it as secular in practice, although the concept of secularism was neither included nor elaborated in the Constitution until a later date. What imparted this character to the Constitution was, at least partly, the historical experience of Indian society.
Whether this concept – popularly described as sarva dharma samabhava – was adequate to ensure a secular state has been a subject of considerable debate. The equal attitude towards all religions does not make the state secular; on the other hand it might implicate the state in religious matters. This fear is not misplaced, as during the past 60 years, in the name of impartiality, the state had to associate itself with almost all religions. The consequence was not the equidistance of the state from all religions, but the involvement of the state in the concerns of all religions. Moreover, the state succumbed to the pressures of all religions. Therefore, instead of being secular the state and its apparatuses were mired in religious matters. Jawaharlal Nehru tried to resist this deviation and kept aloof from participating in religious ceremonies. The then President, Rajendra Prasad, did not uphold that principle and attended the consecration of the newly constructed Somnath temple, to the great chagrin of the Prime Minister. Nehru’s legacy was also not owned by his successors, who in their quest for electoral support compromised the state with the demands of religious leaders. The worst phase was the period of the Ram Janmabhoomi dispute when the Prime Minister appeared to bend over backwards to appease religious leaders. Unless the state remains secular, society can never preserve its secular character. With the decline in the commitment of the state to secularism during the post-Nehru era, secular space in society became progressively smaller, which was eventually colonised by communalism.
Impact of Communalism
What affected the secular character of Indian society most decisively was the intervention of Hindu communalism, which has a long history dating to the 18th century even though riots became frequent only during colonial rule. By the 20th century, communalism had made inroads among both Hindus and Muslims, considerably undermining the secular ethos in society and, finally, leading to Partition. The assassination of Mahatma Gandhij by a Hindu fanatic was a severe setback to secularism. After this Hindu communal organisations were rather dormant, which, however, did not mean they were inactive. The Gandhi assassination did not dampen their spirits, and under the leadership of the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) they soon regrouped and reinvigorated their cultural work and physical training.
The communal organisations were aware that communalism could thrive only by undermining secular consciousness. As a result, the main thrust of the communal agenda was to eliminate the fairly powerful secular hegemony present in most domains. The communal attack on secularism was, therefore, intended to delegitimise it, accusing it of being an alien ideology without roots in Indian soil. Moreover, secular activists were physically intimidated and secular artists and intellectuals were defamed. The purpose was to ensure that the public prestige and acceptability that secularism enjoyed was tarnished so that communalism could occupy the secular space. The campaign was not without any impact. In the face of communal aggression, secularism considerably lost out politically in the 1990s. Martha Nusbawm, an American scholar, observed that during this period India slipped into religious terrorism but managed to slip out of it. This ‘escape’ from the possible continued communal subjection was mainly, though not exclusively, because of the strength of its secular tradition.
Secularism and Communal Harmony
Secularism in India is used as a synonym for communal harmony and religious togetherness. For long, Indian society had a reputation for collaboration and accommodation. The history of India bears testimony to this social condition in which Indians lived for centuries.
They not only shared material resources, but often worshipped the same deity. Hindus and Muslims contributing to the maintenance of each other’s shrines is a fairly widespread phenomenon. In a village in Marathwada where there are no Muslims, the Dargah of a Sufi saint is maintained by Hindus. At Bababudangiri in Karnataka, both Hindus and Muslims worshipped the same saint under different names. The now-popular Hindu shrine of Sabarimala in Kerala has a Muslim ‘deity’ whom all devotees of the Hindu god invariably worship. Although Hindus have now appropriated the Sai Baba of Shirdi, nobody is sure whether he was a Hindu or a Muslim. This mutual relationship is based not on tolerance but on respect for and belief in each other’s faith. Such practices and perspectives were shared by the high and the low – from the rulers to the peasants in the villages.
Communal harmony, however, is not secularism; communal harmony can only be an outcome of secularism, which is a condition in which religion, like any other faith, is a purely personal affair of the individual. It should not intervene in interpersonal relationships or institutional functioning. If secularism is to be a reality, therefore, it is not sufficient to have a secular state, there must also be a secular society. If the society is not secular the state is likely to depart from secular principles, as happened on several occasions during the past 60 years.
The greatest success of communalism has been to vitiate human interpersonal relations in society into a religious relationship, which affected the secular ethos adversely. Social relations thus came to be guided not by secular considerations but by religious identity. The 60 years of experience indicates that the secular character of the Indian state and society has declined steadily.
Religionisation and Secularism
A major and discernible change during the past 60 years has been the rapid religionisation of society. Traditionally, religious rituals were confined to temples, where devotees congregated, or to homes, in which family members participated. Religion is now out in the open, with religious celebrations being conducted in public places and religious processions of all communities crowding the roads with music and fanfare. The improvement in technology has facilitated pilgrimages, and a secular enterprise like tourism has come to be linked with places of religious worship. The resulting commodification of religion is a spectacular change, which has led to the growth of pilgrimage tourism as an industry. As a result, the popular aphorism that India is a religious country does not need much convincing, particularly with the proliferation of meditation centres and godmen. The places of worship have not lagged behind; in fact, the increase in their number is phenomenal. The most saleable commodity in India today is religion.
It is arguable that belief in religion is not antithetical to secularism, if the character of secularism in a multireligious society is essentially communal harmony. It is a common argument that all true believers are secular in outlook and hence do not entertain animosity towards the followers of other religions. This may as well be true. But secularism is not communal harmony; communal harmony is the outcome of secularism. It is, therefore, imperative to explore what constitutes secularism as an ideology beyond harmony.
The real foundation of secularism is poised on a triad consisting of humanism, rationality and universalism. Most religions propound humanism and universalism, but rationality is alien to religion because the essential features of religion are based on faith. Moreover, rituals and superstition derive their legitimacy from religion, and division between religions is marked by religiosity. As a result, religiosity acts as an impediment to secular practice.
A weakness of Indian secularism is that its goal is limited to communal harmony. Even Gandhiji, perhaps the most committed exponent of harmony, could not succeed in his life mission of Hindu-Muslim unity because his passionate efforts were not backed by a secular foundation in society. Given this historical experience, secularism had to be reinvented in post-Independence India. The possible prescription was a creative combination of the Nehruvian notion of a secular state and the Gandhian idea of social togetherness. Unfortunately, the state increasingly lost its secular character and community relationship slipped steadily into religious antagonism, the sad consequences of which were witnessed in Gujarat and Orissa.
Deviations from Secularism
Despite limitations and departures, the post-Independence Indian state maintained a modicum of secular character, although for electoral reasons the state made several deviations from the ideal, particularly during the rule of Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi. The secular character of the state suffered most grievously during the six years when the Bhartiya Janata Party had control over the state apparatuses. The interventions of the state, particularly in education, culture and police administration, were palpably anti-secular. Under its administration the Indian state assumed a distinctly Hindu communal character and used the opportunity to undo the secular traditions of Indian society.
The unfortunate fact is that the ‘secular’ rule that followed has not been able to erase this scar. Moreover, in many of its actions the state continues to carry the anti-secular baggage. Is it not because of that that a Bill for the prevention of communal riots has not been passed? Is it not for the same reason that the recommendations of the Sachar Committee have been kept in cold storage? Or that no action has been taken so far against those who have been indicted by the Liberhan Commission for the Babri Masjid’s demolition after 16 years of its labour?
The more abiding impact of Hindu communal activities has been on undermining the harmonious social relations that existed among different communities. This was attempted through a variety of ways, among them, through communal politics, hate campaigns, falsification of history and instigation of communal riots. Violence is the chief instrument of communalism, which spreads hatred, fear, ghettoisation, and so on, and communal violence is not an end in itself but the beginning of further rift between communities, undermining thereby the existing secular relations.
During the past 60 years, the activities of communal organisations have been such that Indian society has been ideologically and socially communalised. Moreover, communalism has made society brutal; brutality of the kind perpetrated in Gujarat and Orissa was unknown in the past despite communal riots occurring rather regularly.
The communal advance witnessed during the past 60 years is at the expense of secular space. That space has to be reclaimed if India is to remain a democratic society. Being a multireligious and multicultural society, democracy cannot survive in India without secularism. Are there efforts afoot, both by the state and by civil society, to further the process of secularisation?
After the defeat of communal forces in the general elections of 2004, secularism appears to have been put on the back burner both by the secular parties and by civil society organisations. Understandably because there was a sense of relief that the threat had been warded off. The general elections of 2009 gave enough reason for further complacency because communal forces were worsted in them. But secularism does not come to stay because of successes in an election or two. It has to be assiduously constructed through sustained work; continuity is the key to the creation of social consciousness. The secular forces hardly realise this fundamental factor, but believe that secularism can be fought and won in the political arena.
One of the main reasons for the success of Hindu communalism has been the failure of secularism to intervene effectively in the social and cultural domains, in which communalism is ever active. But secularism is as much a cultural and social phenomenon as a political one. The secular forces have not evolved an agenda based on such an understanding. At the same time, anti-secular forces attribute great importance to the non-political sector.
The agenda of secular forces has neither been innovative nor culturally sensitive to evolve an idiom to communicate with the masses. Much of the secular activity does not go beyond press statements by intellectuals and seminars in which committed secularists alone participate. There is hardly any attempt from secular intellectuals to reclaim popular cultural consciousness. The accusation that the secular intellectuals and cultural activists circulate alien ideas among themselves appears to stick, even if it is not entirely true.
If secularism is to be a force in society, it has to reinvent itself in cultural and social terms. Then and then alone it will be a part of the ideology of the masses. The Hindu and Muslim villagers in Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan who greet each other with Ram Ram have their own notion of secular interpersonal relations, despite being believers of different religions. Secularism has to internalise the culture of this social relation if it aims to be a hegemonic force in society.
K.N. Panikkar is former professor of Modern Indian History at JNU and currently Vice-Chairman of the Kerala State Higher Education Council. E-mail: knpanikkar(at)gmail.com
Terror acquittal: But five years lost to prove his innocence
Mohammad Iftekhar Ahsan Mallick (26), former B.Sc. (Bio-tech) student
By Mahtab Alam, TwoCircles.net,
Late night on March 7, 2005, Mohammad Iftekhar Ahsan Mallick, a B.Sc. (Bio-tech) II year student at Dehradun’s Dolphin Institute of Biomedical & Natural Sciences was preparing for his final examinations at his friend’s place. But he had to face ‘greater’ exam that was to last for five years.
Around midnight, some unidentified people with guns forced their way into his friend’s house and took him away, without informing who they were and what they wanted? At first instance, Iftekhar thought that it is kidnapping but later he was told that his kidnappers were actually Delhi Police’s Special Cell who were taking him to Delhi for ‘questioning’ regarding his ‘role’ in a terror plan. He was severely tortured during the police custody and made to sign ‘confessional’ statements.
Torture is still etched in his mind and he rather not talks about it. Iftekhar pleaded his innocence but was made to suffer. He also appealed for speedy trial but even then it took five long years.
Iftekhar was jailed on the charges of being a Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorist plotting to carry out a suicide attack on the Indian Military Academy (IMA) in Dehradun. The Special Cell claimed to have recovered a diary containing ‘inflammatory’ passages from the Quran, which talks about taking revenge of 2002 Gujarat carnage and a pass to an IMA parade. Police also claimed, Iftekhar had been in touch with the Pakistani terrorist Shams, who motivated him to attend Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) meetings in his native town and his name was referred as “Shahid” in Shams’ diary and that the Lashkar had sponsored his education. But Delhi Court refused to believe prosecution stories and Iftekhar was ordered to be released.
After almost five years of imprisonment, on January 8, 2010 Additional Sessions Judge Dharmesh Sharma ordered his release.
“January 2010, not only proved a real New Year for me but brought a new life in real sense for me”, Iftikhar told TwoCircles.net.
Now, he is all set to start his studies once again and will be soon enrolling himself in Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS) in Bihar. “The entire period is full of nightmarish experiences but I want to begin a new life, a respectful life”, he asserts. But he doesn’t want to move out of Bihar as his family is afraid. Iftekhar, who was always hopeful about his acquittal confessed, “no matter how much I try to forget all this, how can I forget those golden years”. He asks painfully “Who will return those five years and how?”
Talking to TwoCircles.net he said there seems to be some planning to malign Muslims and therefore youths are falsely accused of terrorism charges and are made to rot in jail for years. But he has not completely lost faith in the system and suggests Muslims and secular Indians to come forward to make a platform that can fight for justice by preventing abuse of innocent Muslims.
By Mahtab Alam, TwoCircles.net,
Late night on March 7, 2005, Mohammad Iftekhar Ahsan Mallick, a B.Sc. (Bio-tech) II year student at Dehradun’s Dolphin Institute of Biomedical & Natural Sciences was preparing for his final examinations at his friend’s place. But he had to face ‘greater’ exam that was to last for five years.
Around midnight, some unidentified people with guns forced their way into his friend’s house and took him away, without informing who they were and what they wanted? At first instance, Iftekhar thought that it is kidnapping but later he was told that his kidnappers were actually Delhi Police’s Special Cell who were taking him to Delhi for ‘questioning’ regarding his ‘role’ in a terror plan. He was severely tortured during the police custody and made to sign ‘confessional’ statements.
Torture is still etched in his mind and he rather not talks about it. Iftekhar pleaded his innocence but was made to suffer. He also appealed for speedy trial but even then it took five long years.
Iftekhar was jailed on the charges of being a Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorist plotting to carry out a suicide attack on the Indian Military Academy (IMA) in Dehradun. The Special Cell claimed to have recovered a diary containing ‘inflammatory’ passages from the Quran, which talks about taking revenge of 2002 Gujarat carnage and a pass to an IMA parade. Police also claimed, Iftekhar had been in touch with the Pakistani terrorist Shams, who motivated him to attend Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) meetings in his native town and his name was referred as “Shahid” in Shams’ diary and that the Lashkar had sponsored his education. But Delhi Court refused to believe prosecution stories and Iftekhar was ordered to be released.
After almost five years of imprisonment, on January 8, 2010 Additional Sessions Judge Dharmesh Sharma ordered his release.
“January 2010, not only proved a real New Year for me but brought a new life in real sense for me”, Iftikhar told TwoCircles.net.
Now, he is all set to start his studies once again and will be soon enrolling himself in Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS) in Bihar. “The entire period is full of nightmarish experiences but I want to begin a new life, a respectful life”, he asserts. But he doesn’t want to move out of Bihar as his family is afraid. Iftekhar, who was always hopeful about his acquittal confessed, “no matter how much I try to forget all this, how can I forget those golden years”. He asks painfully “Who will return those five years and how?”
Talking to TwoCircles.net he said there seems to be some planning to malign Muslims and therefore youths are falsely accused of terrorism charges and are made to rot in jail for years. But he has not completely lost faith in the system and suggests Muslims and secular Indians to come forward to make a platform that can fight for justice by preventing abuse of innocent Muslims.
NATO Kills More Afghan Civilians
IslamOnline.net & News Agencies
KABUL – Scores of Afghan civilians, including women and a child, have been killed in a NATO airstrike, dealing a major blow to US-led efforts to win Afghan hearts and minds.
"Initial reports indicate that NATO fired Sunday on a convoy of three vehicles ... killing at least 27 civilians, including four women and one child, and injuring 12 others," the Afghan cabinet said in a statement cited by Reuters.
US troops said the civilians had been killed as they approached a joint NATO-Afghan unity in Gujran district of Daykundi province.
"We are extremely saddened by the tragic loss of innocent lives," US General Stanley McChrystal, commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, said.
"I have made it clear to our forces that we are here to protect the Afghan people and inadvertently killing or injuring civilians undermines their trust and confidence in our mission."
The killing is the third by NATO troops in a week.
Last week, seven civilians were killed and two others wounded in a NATO airstrike in southern Afghanistan.
The attack also came days after seven Afghan policemen were killed in a NATO bombing in the northern province of Kunduz.
Also on Monday, 14 people, including an influential Afghan leader, were killed in a suicide bombing in eastern Afghanistan on borders with Pakistan.
Civilian casualties are a sensitive issue in Afghanistan, where Karzai and his Western backers are trying to win Afghan hearts and minds against Taliban.
Analysts have repeatedly warned that the indiscriminate killing of civilians is turning ordinary Afghans against foreign troops and eroding fragile public support for West-backed Karzai's government.
Anger
The Afghan civilians have been growing angry with the indiscriminately killings and night home searches by NATO troops.
"People still complain about how the house searches are being conducted,” said Abdur Rahman Saber, head of a local council monitoring the plight of civilians.
“The joint forces should not view every person here with suspicion of being a Taliban or a relative of one.”
Nearly 15,000 US-led troops launched a major offensive - dubbed Mushtarak (Together) - into Taliban stronghold of Helmand early this month.
The military phase of the offensive, now into a ninth day, will be followed by efforts to reassert government control with security and services.
Afghan police have moved into the target area, but commanders say it could be another month before it is cleared of Taliban fighters and their booby trap bombs.
Once controlling a village, residents are called into mosques by the troops to convince that the offensive aims to protect them against the Taliban.
"When the government and its foreign allies want the people on their side, they should respect every resident here,” said Saber.
“People should not feel any sense of insecurity from Afghan or foreign troops."
KABUL – Scores of Afghan civilians, including women and a child, have been killed in a NATO airstrike, dealing a major blow to US-led efforts to win Afghan hearts and minds.
"Initial reports indicate that NATO fired Sunday on a convoy of three vehicles ... killing at least 27 civilians, including four women and one child, and injuring 12 others," the Afghan cabinet said in a statement cited by Reuters.
US troops said the civilians had been killed as they approached a joint NATO-Afghan unity in Gujran district of Daykundi province.
"We are extremely saddened by the tragic loss of innocent lives," US General Stanley McChrystal, commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, said.
"I have made it clear to our forces that we are here to protect the Afghan people and inadvertently killing or injuring civilians undermines their trust and confidence in our mission."
The killing is the third by NATO troops in a week.
Last week, seven civilians were killed and two others wounded in a NATO airstrike in southern Afghanistan.
The attack also came days after seven Afghan policemen were killed in a NATO bombing in the northern province of Kunduz.
Also on Monday, 14 people, including an influential Afghan leader, were killed in a suicide bombing in eastern Afghanistan on borders with Pakistan.
Civilian casualties are a sensitive issue in Afghanistan, where Karzai and his Western backers are trying to win Afghan hearts and minds against Taliban.
Analysts have repeatedly warned that the indiscriminate killing of civilians is turning ordinary Afghans against foreign troops and eroding fragile public support for West-backed Karzai's government.
Anger
The Afghan civilians have been growing angry with the indiscriminately killings and night home searches by NATO troops.
"People still complain about how the house searches are being conducted,” said Abdur Rahman Saber, head of a local council monitoring the plight of civilians.
“The joint forces should not view every person here with suspicion of being a Taliban or a relative of one.”
Nearly 15,000 US-led troops launched a major offensive - dubbed Mushtarak (Together) - into Taliban stronghold of Helmand early this month.
The military phase of the offensive, now into a ninth day, will be followed by efforts to reassert government control with security and services.
Afghan police have moved into the target area, but commanders say it could be another month before it is cleared of Taliban fighters and their booby trap bombs.
Once controlling a village, residents are called into mosques by the troops to convince that the offensive aims to protect them against the Taliban.
"When the government and its foreign allies want the people on their side, they should respect every resident here,” said Saber.
“People should not feel any sense of insecurity from Afghan or foreign troops."
Muslim Hearts for Haiti
IslamOnline.net & Newspapers
CAIRO — Local Muslims in the US Midwest state of Missouri have organized a benefit dinner to contribute to feeding the hungry in the quake-hit Haiti.
"We found out from our friends who are working in Haiti right now that the biggest problem is hunger," Ahmad Sheikh, an area physician and co-organizer of the benefit dinner, told the Southeast Missourian on Monday, February 22.
The UN Food and Agriculture Organization warned last week that Haiti is facing dire shortage of food more than a month after 7.0-magnitude quake killed nearly 217,000 people and left more than one million homeless.
It noted that many Haitians were eating the seeds they have stored for the next planting season and eating or selling their livestock.
"They're really, really suffering," lamented Sheikh.
Seeking to raise money to feed desperate Haitians, Muslims in Cape Girardeau city, southeast Missouri, held a benefit dinner for 400 donors.
Nearly 20 Muslim volunteers cooked and served Middle Eastern cuisine for the diners.
In addition to the time donated, all of the food was also given by the Muslim community.
Organizers said donations and the proceeds from dinner, themed Hearts for Haiti, will go to Helping Hand USA for relief efforts in Haiti and the Haitian Relief Fund.
"We work very closely with people who are doing relief efforts in Haiti and all over the world," Sheikh said.
Hailed
Muslims and non-Muslims who attended or participated in the event praised the Muslim initiative.
"I'm so glad there's a turnout for the Islamic community," said Ruth Ann Orr, a dinner.
Paul Mingus and Tina McRaven, invited to the event by their friends at the Islamic Center, were equally appreciative.
"It's for a good cause, and it's an opportunity to try different food," McRaven said.
Angie Tygett, a volunteer, said she was thrilled to see the mosque hosting an event to support Haiti.
"It's wonderful.
"I just think we all need to be more global," she said.
This is not the first time the Islamic center organize benefit dinners for a humanitarian cause.
A similar one was organized in 2004 after a tsunami devastated several South Asian countries, including Indonesia.
"Wherever there's a catastrophe, we try to create awareness and work with it,"
CAIRO — Local Muslims in the US Midwest state of Missouri have organized a benefit dinner to contribute to feeding the hungry in the quake-hit Haiti.
"We found out from our friends who are working in Haiti right now that the biggest problem is hunger," Ahmad Sheikh, an area physician and co-organizer of the benefit dinner, told the Southeast Missourian on Monday, February 22.
The UN Food and Agriculture Organization warned last week that Haiti is facing dire shortage of food more than a month after 7.0-magnitude quake killed nearly 217,000 people and left more than one million homeless.
It noted that many Haitians were eating the seeds they have stored for the next planting season and eating or selling their livestock.
"They're really, really suffering," lamented Sheikh.
Seeking to raise money to feed desperate Haitians, Muslims in Cape Girardeau city, southeast Missouri, held a benefit dinner for 400 donors.
Nearly 20 Muslim volunteers cooked and served Middle Eastern cuisine for the diners.
In addition to the time donated, all of the food was also given by the Muslim community.
Organizers said donations and the proceeds from dinner, themed Hearts for Haiti, will go to Helping Hand USA for relief efforts in Haiti and the Haitian Relief Fund.
"We work very closely with people who are doing relief efforts in Haiti and all over the world," Sheikh said.
Hailed
Muslims and non-Muslims who attended or participated in the event praised the Muslim initiative.
"I'm so glad there's a turnout for the Islamic community," said Ruth Ann Orr, a dinner.
Paul Mingus and Tina McRaven, invited to the event by their friends at the Islamic Center, were equally appreciative.
"It's for a good cause, and it's an opportunity to try different food," McRaven said.
Angie Tygett, a volunteer, said she was thrilled to see the mosque hosting an event to support Haiti.
"It's wonderful.
"I just think we all need to be more global," she said.
This is not the first time the Islamic center organize benefit dinners for a humanitarian cause.
A similar one was organized in 2004 after a tsunami devastated several South Asian countries, including Indonesia.
"Wherever there's a catastrophe, we try to create awareness and work with it,"
Israel Annexes West Bank Mosques
IslamOnline.net & Newspapers
CAIRO — The Israeli occupation authorities have decided to place two historic mosques in the occupied West Bank to a list of alleged Jewish heritage sites, drawing immediate rebuke from Palestinians and Israelis alike.
"This announcement is an act of aggression against the cultural and religious rights of the Palestinian people," Hamdan Taha, director of the Palestinian Tourism Ministry's Antiquities Department, told the independent Maan news agency on Monday, February 22.
Hawkish Israeli Premier Binyamin Netanyahu announced Sunday, February 21, adding Ibrahimi Mosque in Al-Khalil (Hebron) and Bilal Mosque in Bethlehem to a list of 150 so-called Jewish heritage sites that would be renovated to reconnect Israelis to their history.
The two Muslim sites were not included in the original plan which was first presented by Netanyahu on February 3.
But under pressure from right-wing ministers, Netanyahu decided to add the two sites to the plan.
Built in 635 A.D., Ibrahimi Mosque is one of the first Muslim worship places in Palestine.
But Jewish extremists claim the two sites, known to Israelis as the Cave of the Patriachs and Rachel's Tomb, belong to historical Jewish heritage.
"Instead of making use of heritage to promote peace, it is being used as a means to promote war," lamented Taha, the Palestinian official.
Taha asserted that attempt to designate the two mosques as Jewish heritage sites "reflects an artificial history that solely serves Israel's settlement policy."
"A religious shrine respected by Muslims, Christians, and Jews should be respected as a cultural and religious symbol, not as an opportunity to obstruct international efforts to reach a peace agreement."
Condemnation
Palestinians in Al-Khalil declared a general strike Monday to pretest the Israeli decision.
Al-Khalil Mayor Kahled Al-Eseili urged UNESCO to act quickly to protect the status of the Muslim shrines.
"(We urge UNESCO) to protect the Ibrahimi Mosque, prevent its desecration, and act against alterations to its features."
He asserted that the international law, including the Hague conventions, obliges the occupation authority not to change the historical heritage of the occupied.
"International law forbids an occupying power to change the status quo in the occupied territory," agreed Israeli Arab Hadash Party Chairman Muhammad Barakei.
"We are dealing with two mosques that have been in existence for hundreds of years in both Al-Khalil and Bethlehem, and this decision of the Netanyahu-Barak-Lieberman government indicates that they plan to continue the occupation and the bloodshed in the region."
Israeli peace activists also blasted the move.
"The heritage of Netanyahu and his government is a bi-national state and the continued development of the settlements," Peace Now director-general Yariv Oppenheimer said.
"In the Cave of the Patriarchs and Rachel’s Tomb, Netanyahu is burying the two-state solution and making negotiations [with the Palestinians] irrelevant."
The left-wing Israeli party Meretz also slammed the decision.
"This is another attempt to blur the borders between the State of Israel and the occupied territories," Meretz party chairman Chaim Oron told the Hebrew-language daily Yedioth Ahronoth.
"All it needs is a bit of pressure from the right, and Netanyahu falls into line. This decision puts Netanyahu's Bar-Ilan declaration of two states for two peoples in an absurd light."
CAIRO — The Israeli occupation authorities have decided to place two historic mosques in the occupied West Bank to a list of alleged Jewish heritage sites, drawing immediate rebuke from Palestinians and Israelis alike.
"This announcement is an act of aggression against the cultural and religious rights of the Palestinian people," Hamdan Taha, director of the Palestinian Tourism Ministry's Antiquities Department, told the independent Maan news agency on Monday, February 22.
Hawkish Israeli Premier Binyamin Netanyahu announced Sunday, February 21, adding Ibrahimi Mosque in Al-Khalil (Hebron) and Bilal Mosque in Bethlehem to a list of 150 so-called Jewish heritage sites that would be renovated to reconnect Israelis to their history.
The two Muslim sites were not included in the original plan which was first presented by Netanyahu on February 3.
But under pressure from right-wing ministers, Netanyahu decided to add the two sites to the plan.
Built in 635 A.D., Ibrahimi Mosque is one of the first Muslim worship places in Palestine.
But Jewish extremists claim the two sites, known to Israelis as the Cave of the Patriachs and Rachel's Tomb, belong to historical Jewish heritage.
"Instead of making use of heritage to promote peace, it is being used as a means to promote war," lamented Taha, the Palestinian official.
Taha asserted that attempt to designate the two mosques as Jewish heritage sites "reflects an artificial history that solely serves Israel's settlement policy."
"A religious shrine respected by Muslims, Christians, and Jews should be respected as a cultural and religious symbol, not as an opportunity to obstruct international efforts to reach a peace agreement."
Condemnation
Palestinians in Al-Khalil declared a general strike Monday to pretest the Israeli decision.
Al-Khalil Mayor Kahled Al-Eseili urged UNESCO to act quickly to protect the status of the Muslim shrines.
"(We urge UNESCO) to protect the Ibrahimi Mosque, prevent its desecration, and act against alterations to its features."
He asserted that the international law, including the Hague conventions, obliges the occupation authority not to change the historical heritage of the occupied.
"International law forbids an occupying power to change the status quo in the occupied territory," agreed Israeli Arab Hadash Party Chairman Muhammad Barakei.
"We are dealing with two mosques that have been in existence for hundreds of years in both Al-Khalil and Bethlehem, and this decision of the Netanyahu-Barak-Lieberman government indicates that they plan to continue the occupation and the bloodshed in the region."
Israeli peace activists also blasted the move.
"The heritage of Netanyahu and his government is a bi-national state and the continued development of the settlements," Peace Now director-general Yariv Oppenheimer said.
"In the Cave of the Patriarchs and Rachel’s Tomb, Netanyahu is burying the two-state solution and making negotiations [with the Palestinians] irrelevant."
The left-wing Israeli party Meretz also slammed the decision.
"This is another attempt to blur the borders between the State of Israel and the occupied territories," Meretz party chairman Chaim Oron told the Hebrew-language daily Yedioth Ahronoth.
"All it needs is a bit of pressure from the right, and Netanyahu falls into line. This decision puts Netanyahu's Bar-Ilan declaration of two states for two peoples in an absurd light."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)