By New Age Islam Edit
Desk
19 November
2020
• Attacking Love: One Law For Interfaith
Marriage, Another For Everyone Else, Whither Uniform Civil Code?
TOI
Editorials
• Why Pakistan's Dossier On 'Indian Terrorism'
Is Ultimately A Damp Squib
By Vivek Katju
• Pakistan’s Allegations At UN Are Laughable
But India Can’t Take Them Lightly
By Tara Kartha
• Biden May Bode Well For Afghan Peace Process
By Lt Gen NPS Hira (Retd)
-----
Attacking Love: One Law For Interfaith
Marriage, Another For Everyone Else, Whither Uniform Civil Code?
TOI Editorials
November
19, 2020
Madhya
Pradesh’s BJP government is tabling a bill to prosecute “love jihad”, a
non-existent entity that also weighs heavily on the minds of other BJP state
governments. The orchestrated thrust for such a law is surprising because
central agencies haven’t detected a single love jihad case in the country.
Hapless citizens must bear the cost of such unnecessary over-legislation, even
now a prime underlying factor for poor governance in the country. Inclusive
nationalism – or uniting the land and its people under one law, with the state
not discriminating against citizens on grounds of region, religion, language,
caste and sex – takes a beating here. In this regard, MP’s state sponsored
discrimination directly challenges Article 15.
Far from
BJP’s longstanding Uniform Civil Code promise, the love jihad legislative
trajectory leads to a differentiated civil code. Where the Special Marriage Act
invites Indians irrespective of religion to enter into a marital relationship,
the MP bill frowns upon allowing the same right to interfaith couples. The
interfaith couple, and a religious priest if theirs is a personal law marriage,
must inform the district magistrate 30 days before the wedding. With offences
being cognisable and non-bailable, attracting a five year jail term even for
collaborators, the law will all but criminalise interfaith marriage.
A country
aiming for a nation under one tax, one ration card, one civil and criminal code
contradicts itself by herding citizens into religious ghettos, daring those who
mingle with state sponsored harassment. Consenting adults having to contend
with the state as gatekeeper and vetoholder in marriage, while being told in
other contexts to become job creators and empowered citizens, betrays yet
another contradiction. The new India is beginning to look like a really archaic
India. Such laws will pose hurdles for New Delhi’s foreign policy as well.
Unfavourable international attention stemming from discriminatory legislation
with potential to fuel social conflict has grave reputational and soft power
costs – recall CAA.
The Centre
can, of course, reveal its hand when the bill comes to the stage of governor
giving assent or referring to the President. The easiest course for Centre
would be to reform the SMA’s convoluted provisions that force harried couples
to take the easier route of religious marriages. Such a modernising move can
end the love jihad conversation over religious conversion and earn the
gratitude of lovestruck youngsters. And if all else fails there is the Supreme
Court, which must act as the conscience keeper of the Constitution.
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/blogs/toi-editorials/attacking-love-one-law-for-interfaith-marriage-another-for-everyone-else-whither-uniform-civil-code/
-----
Why Pakistan's Dossier On 'Indian Terrorism' Is
Ultimately A Damp Squib
By Vivek Katju
19 November
2020
Pakistan
foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi and director-general of inter-services
public relations (ISPR) Major General Babar Iftikhar held a joint press
conference on November 14 to reveal that a dossier had been put together
containing what they claimed was evidence of Indian terrorism and other
negative activities to damage Pakistan.
While the
dossier was not released, its overview, key messages and salient features were
conveyed to the media, verbally and in two documents.
These
documents show that the dossier’s allegations are an attempt to give
specificity to the charge that India has been promoting state terrorism in
Pakistan through that country’s disaffected Pathan, Baloch and Muhajir groups.
The allegations are full of shortcomings and without any credible proof. The
dossier is also full of factual errors. This robs it of credibility, leave
alone authority.
It would
be, therefore, dismissed by the international community as one more amateurish
effort to train the spotlight on India and away from Pakistan on terrorism.
Indeed, the dossier will be counterproductive for it will poorly reflect on the
ISI in the region and beyond.
Pakistan
has chafed at having acquired the well-deserved reputation gradually over the
past two decades as a principal centre of terrorism. There is no doubt that the
international community considers it as such with the major western powers
asking it regularly to control, if not eliminate, the terrorist groups that are
based on its territory.
Though the
situation was not always so. For instance, in the 1990s, the major powers,
including the United States, were aware of the activities of Pakistani
terrorist groups in India and Afghanistan but looked the other way. That
emboldened Pakistan and also gave it the feeling that the international
community had no objection to the activities of groups such as the
Lashkar-e-Taiba (which it promoted and controlled) against India.
Certainly,
the fact that Delhi’s démarches to the major powers against Pakistan’s
terrorism were consistently ignored showed that they simply did not care and
even considered the use of the tanzeems as legitimate in pursuing its interests
against India. This situation began to change only after 9/11.
Then,
Pakistan’s connections with the Taliban regime in Afghanistan which harboured
al-Qaeda began to matter. The support of the Pakistani tanzeems to al-Qaeda
began to hurt the interests of the West.
It’s at
this time that what India had been saying all through the 1990s on the dangers
posed by the Pakistani tanzeems began to be heard with at least partially open
ears. However, as Pakistan’s cooperation in the war in Afghanistan was
essential, the US and other western countries were unwilling to take a forceful
stand on Pakistan’s terror against India. Privately, they made feeble noises on
the issue to Pakistan. This was more to inform India that they had taken up the
matter with Pakistan and nothing more.
It was only
after the Mumbai terrorist attack of November 26, 2008, that the major
countries realised that Pakistani terrorism put the Indian government under
great pressure to take kinetic action. As open hostilities between neighbours
would be obviously undesirable, the major powers began to put some pressure on
Pakistan to curb the tanzeems. At the same time, they also began to publicly
acknowledge the activities of these groups.
Yet
Pakistan was able to take this in its stride for it did not materially impact
on its cooperation with the western powers nor did the Pakistan army’s
relations with the military establishments of the major powers suffer. There
was an embarrassment to the army with the action against Osama bin Laden in
Abbottabad in May 2011, but that could not even remotely involve India. Hence,
it did not purposefully seek to make allegations against India for fomenting
terrorism in Pakistan.
Olive
branch
Prime
Minister Narendra Modi essentially pursued the path of peacemaking with
Pakistan from May 2014 (when he assumed office) till December 2015 when he
visited Lahore to meet his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif.
The
Pakistan army wanted to put an end to any peace-making opening and the
Pathankot attack of January 2016 followed. Still Modi did not abandon the quest
for peace for he allowed a Pakistan investigation team which included an ISI
officer to visit India and go to Pathankot too.
However,
when after the killing of Burhan Wani both the Pakistan army and Nawaz Sharif
went full throttle on provoking Kashmiri opinion against the government, Modi
went cold on Pakistan. This sentiment got consolidated after the Uri attack and
the surgical strike response.
That
response ensured that international opinion got more serious in asking Pakistan
to control the tanzeems and abandon the use of terrorism. Of course, Pakistan
was unwilling to do so.
Meanwhile,
in March 2016, after abducting Kulbhushan Jadhav, Pakistan decided to use his
so-called confessions to show the international community that India was not
only undertaking espionage in Pakistan but using Balochi separatists to
undertake terrorist acts. A high-profile press conference was held at which the
Pakistan information minister and the DG ISPR gave details of what Jadhav had
purportedly told them.
They named
Indian intelligence officers and also National Security Advisor Ajit Doval as
Jadhav’s handlers. In the International Court of Justice proceedings both in
written and oral submissions Pakistan undertook crude and targeted propaganda
against Indian intelligence officials and again specially focussed on Doval.
All this was designed to impress international opinion that India was
sponsoring terrorism in Pakistan. However, the major powers simply ignored
these Pakistani endeavours and the dossiers that Pakistan reportedly gave them.
The
February 2019 Pulwama terrorist attack by the Jaish-e-Mohammed, the Balakot
aerial attack by India and Pakistan’s response led the western powers to
realise that Pakistan’s pursuit of terrorism marked a dangerous escalation.
Pressures on Pakistan to eliminate terrorist groups increased but Pakistan has
resisted these pressures. The latest dossier is part of the response to the
pressures.
It is part
of the same chain of attempts at influencing international opinion against
India and deflect attention from Pakistan.
It will not
succeed not only because Pakistan’s credibility is very low but also because of
its untenable contents. For instance, it claims that a cell was established in
the R&AW “under the direct supervision of PM” to “undermine, delay and
disrupt” CPEC projects and for this work US$ 500 million has been allocated. Any
one with even a modicum of knowledge of how intelligence services work would
know that elected prime ministers never directly supervise intelligence work.
Besides to claim that so large an amount has been allotted is prima facie
preposterous as is the claim that a militia of 700 persons has been raised to
implement for the work.
There is
repeated mention of how India is using Afghan soil to foment trouble in
Balochistan.
The Indian
embassy and consulates have been mentioned as coordinating such activities.
These claims are bogus for in some cases the names of officers have been
mentioned who do not exist and in other cases fingers have been pointed at
ambassadors.
Having
remained an ambassador himself and in Afghanistan this writer can authoritatively
assert that no Indian ambassador involves himself in work of the kind alleged
in the dossier.
This is
simply not part of the Indian diplomatic tradition. What is interesting is that
the names of the one ambassador who has been named has not been spelt
correctly. This confirms the slipshod manner in which this dossier has been
prepared.
Details of
terrorist incidents are mentioned in the dossier. Of these the most serious was
the Peshawar Army School massacre of December 2014 which took the lives of more
than 130 children.
A man
places a rose after lighting candles in front of portraits of the victims of
the Taliban attack on the Army Public School in Peshawar, during a candlelight
vigil in Lahore December 19, 2014. Credit: Reuters/Mohsin Raza
A man places
a rose after lighting candles in front of portraits of the victims of the
Taliban attack on the Army Public School in Peshawar, during a candlelight
vigil in Lahore December 19, 2014. Photo: Reuters/Mohsin Raza
It is
noteworthy that the dossier does not allege that India sponsored the attack but
that Malik Faridoon who it is claimed to have been involved in the planning of
the school attack went to the Indian Consulate in Jalalabad to celebrate. Thus,
it is hinted that India was involved in the attack. This is an unwarranted and
unsubstantiated inference which only shows that the bogus nature of the
charges. It is also noteworthy that all the groups involved are Pakistani.
There is
also an internal political objective that the dossier is meant to serve at this
juncture. The army and Imran Khan have asserted that Nawaz Sharif is serving
Indian interests and this dossier is meant to remind people that he is cohorts
with a country which is sponsoring terror against Pakistan; thereby tarnishing
his image further.
This
dossier is, all in all, a damp squib. Pakistani attempts at targeting India on
terrorism charges are futile. India must continue its pressure on Pakistan on
terrorism directly and through the FATF which is entirely within the ambit of international
law.
The world
has come a long way from ignoring Pakistani terror to putting some pressure on
it. This is resulting in Pakistan to blame India as a sponsor of terror. But
except for a few of its cronies the world will simply laugh away Pakistani
claims.
-----
Vivek Katju is a former Indian diplomat who
served as India’s ambassador to Afghanistan and Myanmar, and as secretary,
Ministry of External Affairs.
https://thewire.in/south-asia/pakistan-dossier-india-terrorism-fatf-raw-isi
----
Pakistan’s Allegations At UN Are Laughable But
India Can’t Take Them Lightly
By Tara Kartha
18
November, 2020
Pakistan is
certainly on the war path, and not just on the Line of Control, where incidents
of firing have escalated causing civilian deaths and forest fires even as security forces noted a rise in infiltration.
The Imran Khan government has resorted to making sweeping allegations against
India, presenting dossiers to officials at the United Nations on alleged Indian
assistance to terrorists and accusations of sabotaging the China-Pakistan
Economic Corridor. At one level, the charges are laughable. At another, it’s
worth admitting that Pakistan is adept at spreading its allegations,
particularly in the US. Ignoring this, as we usually do, may not be good enough.
Mud sticks.
The brief
to the envoys of the five permanent representatives to the UN Security Council,
on alleged India-sponsored terrorism, occurred days after presenting dossiers
directly to the UN Secretary General. Earlier, Pakistan was tom-tomming the
compilation of yet another dossier covering ‘Indian action’ at three levels.
First, it alleged that New Delhi supported and executed terror attacks in
Pakistan and used its banks to finance terrorists. Second, it failed to punish
perpetrators of terrorist attacks against minorities in India. Third, and most
interesting of all, India was becoming a centre of terrorist activity. That’s
quite a bagful of mischief.
There are
other mischievous allegations, including one that India has set up a dedicated
cell to counter the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), allotting PKR 80
billion (about Rs 37 billion) for the purpose. Cash-strapped intelligence
agencies would have a fit. Other charges include making trouble in
Pakistan-occupied Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan.
Pakistan’s
allegations are hardly new, with
Islamabad declaring for decades that India used dozens of embassies and
consulates in Afghanistan for spawning terrorism against Pakistan. Former US
ambassador to Pakistan Richard Olson pointed out that India had four
consulates, not 24; but that sober fact was lost in the noise. Under Prime
Minister Imran Khan, this noise has gone up considerably, particularly after
the appointment of his special adviser Moeed Yusuf, who, in an interview with
an Indian channel, famously declared that he was ready with never-before-seen
‘evidence’ against India.
It is this
‘evidence’ that is now being shared. A briefing by Foreign Minister Shah
Mehmood Qureshi and DG ISPR Maj. Gen. BabarIftikhar made several allegations, peppered
with ostensible ‘details’ to make the whole seem credible. One of these was
that India has united several terrorist groups under the Tehrik-i-Taliban
Pakistan – whose spokesman Ehsanullah Ehsan was allowed to ‘escape’ from army
custody. It alleged that the act was masterminded by one “Colonel Rajesh” from
the Indian embassy (there is a Brigadier and a Group Captain but no Colonel at
the embassy), another Major Fermin Das (also untraceable), and a selection of
RAW officials — all apparently working from consulates on Pakistan’s border
(none, as US officials note). There’s more — camps in Dehradun for support to
Altaf Hussain, the founder of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement leader, who last
year requested PM Modi for some money to take Pakistan to the International
Court of Justice; and a lot more in the same vein.
But as
always, Islamabad is over-stretching itself. Both Moeed and the officials
briefing the media accused India of the tragic attack in 2014 on an army school
in Peshawar, where 132 children were killed; this after Pakistani authorities
hanged the perpetrators (in 2015 and 2017). Killing women and children is not
something India’s intelligence agency does, simply because no one would ever
authorise it in a rather leaky democracy. But then Pakistan can’t be expected
to understand that. Islamabad, however,
would do well to recall a series of attacks against schools in Afghanistan that
began the same year. Such crimes perpetrated by the Taliban in Pakistan are
hardly likely to have been forgotten.
Twisting
financial probity
In its
reported dossier, Pakistan has cited the
ongoing investigations by the Financial Crime Enforcement Network of the US
Treasury Department to make its case that India is financing terrorism and is
guilty of money laundering. Neither is true. The worldwide investigation has
flagged thousands of transactions, including those of some 3,000 British
companies and suspicious transactions from a Russian Oligarch that ended up
with the ruling Conservative Party.
In India’s
case, some 44 banks have been ‘red flagged’, including State Bank of India
(SBI). None of these involve any evidence of wrongdoing, but are a directive
for investigation. In other instances, individuals identified are already under
probe, or under arrest. The whole thing is an exercise in financial probity,
with hundreds of journalists also involved. Ironically, one such investigation
includes a Pakistani financier who moved $14-15 billion annually for customers
such as Dawood Ibrahim, the al-Qaeda, Taliban and Lashkar-e-Taiba among others.
Old and new
charges
Then there
are Islamabad’s now familiar charges that India has not acted against the
accused in the 2007 Samjhauta Express bombings case. That is not entirely true.
The case, which dragged on for 12 years, ending in acquittal of all accused, is
certainly a shameful indictment of the judicial and investigation prowess in
India. But unlike Pakistan, the accused did not disappear, like Sajid Mir and
others did in the Mumbai attacks case, but were arrested, with due trial
process.
Finally, a
new — and most interesting — charge is
the allegation that “India is emerging as a hotbed of UN designated terrorist
organizations and posing a great risk to the region”. In this, Pakistan cites
the presence in India of the Islamic State and the AQIS (al-Qaeda in the Indian
Subcontinent) as evidence. This is sheer cheek, given that Asim Umar, the AQIS
leader, is sheltered in Pakistan and even married there.
The recent
busting of a module also showed strong connections to Rawalpindi. Then there is
the Islamic State that has certainly made some limited inroad into parts of
India. But as all agree, this is minimal given India’s large Muslim population,
and even in Kashmir, where established jihadi groups wont give the IS or AQIS
much leg-room.
But
Pakistan’s flagging this needs to be dealt with through positive action. First,
police forces need to be a little more
circumspect about tagging ‘Islamic State’ onto every troublemaker. And second,
Prime Minister Modi’s message of “reaching
out” to Muslims needs to be implemented by his party leaders.
Meanwhile,
it’s time to go on the offensive, using not mysterious allusions to sabotage
and hidden camps, but simply showing up Pakistan for what it is – a highly
unstable terrorist-ridden state, with a very uneasy head at the top.
-----
Tara
Kartha is former director, National Security Council Secretariat. Views are
personal.
https://theprint.in/opinion/pakistans-allegations-at-un-are-laughable-but-india-cant-take-them-lightly/546814/
-----
Biden May Bode Well For Afghan Peace Process
By Lt Gen NPS Hira
(Retd)
Nov 19,
2020
THE US will
reduce the number of its troops in Afghanistan from 4,500 to 2,500 by
mid-January, the Pentagon announced on Tuesday. The Afghan peace process has
not made any significant headway so far, except getting the warring groups to
the negotiating table. The prime motivation for the US to get the Afghan
government and the Taliban to talk was the election agenda of Trump. In the
run-up to the elections, he went to the extent of making a statement that all
US troops may be home before Christmas.
The
withdrawal of US troops also fitted into Trump’s foreign policy in general,
which was isolationist. It also made sense to Trump’s business instincts not to
keep pouring US resources into a venture which in his perspective was nothing
but loss-making. He is happy to cut out his losses and get out of Afghanistan.
Trump had also chosen to abandon the good old policy of the US to promote
democracies around the world. He is also not too concerned with the issue of
human rights. Therefore, he does not mind the Taliban getting into a dominant
position in the Afghanistan government, as long as the US troops can leave
Afghanistan. His policies have been more focused on trade and economy. His
emphatic effort to arm-twist President Ashraf Ghani to come to the negotiating
table despite the fact that the Afghan government was not a signatory to the
deal, was unfair to Ghani.
As far as
the Taliban are concerned, it has been too happy to play Trump’s game because
it has everything to gain by doing so. By giving a simple guarantee that the
Taliban would ensure no attacks on the US or its interests from the soil of
Afghanistan, Taliban could get an assurance from the US to withdraw its forces
from Afghanistan. That is exactly what the Taliban had wanted all these years
from the US. As far as the guarantee is concerned, Taliban may not be in a
position to ensure it or it would blame any infringement of it, on the Islamic
State or Al Qaeda. However, the Taliban’s rank and file may resist a deal which
does not ensure implementation of the Sharia laws and dominance of Taliban in
the future Afghan government structure. That is the reason why the Taliban has
maintained a constant tempo of its operations against the Afghan forces
throughout the peace process.
The outcome
of the US elections has changed the situation for that country. Biden is likely
to work towards US retaining its prominent position in the world. He will
endeavour to promote a democratic government in Afghanistan, instead of a
Taliban-dominated government. He is sensitive to human rights and would not
like to allow a free run to the Taliban to violate the human rights of the
Afghan people. Though he too has promised to the US people to get US troops
home, he is unlikely to do so at a high cost, which was acceptable to Trump. He
is also likely to listen to his military, which is of the opinion that the
withdrawal of US troops in a hurry is squandering the gains made in the past.
It is fair
to assume that Biden will attempt to strike a balance in his actions in keeping
with all his priorities. Therefore, Biden’s nomination to the US presidency is
bad news for the Taliban and good news for the Afghan people. At this stage,
Taliban has two choices. The first is to pull its straps and continue to fight
for as long as it takes to gain a dominant position. The second choice is a
climbdown and to make reasonable compromises on its Islamic agenda. It is no
secret that the Taliban too is tired of fighting and so are the Afghan people.
It is noteworthy that in the month of September 2019, when Trump had sprung a
surprise and put a stop to negotiations with the Taliban, it was seen to be
much nervous. It could feel the ground slipping below its feet. The Afghan
people too desire the Taliban to reach an agreement with the Afghan government,
which would bring peace to the country. Further reduction of US troops at this
stage is counter-productive as it emboldens the Taliban and makes Biden’s
position difficult in handling the situation in future.
While the
Taliban may try to put up a front to continue the fight, it too has realised
that it may not be able to achieve a military victory in a reasonable time
frame and that it cannot run Afghanistan without financial aid from the West.
Afghanistan is strategically important to the United States. Biden is likely to
force the Taliban to make difficult choices. He is likely to push the Taliban
to once again feel the heat of US operations, if it does not fall in line with
the US dictates. The nomination of Trump has emboldened Ghani as well as raised
the morale of the Afghan National Army, which is now assured of a significant
support from Biden as compared to Trump. Biden is unlikely to leave the Afghan
people in a lurch because of his concerns for human rights and would endeavour
to establish a democratic government in Afghanistan.
For India,
it is a positive turn of events in Afghanistan. If a solution is to come about
in the tenure of Biden, India is likely to see an Afghan government more
inclined towards it than to Pakistan. India may have been somewhat subdued by
the recent visit of Abdullah Abdullah, who privately conveyed to the Indian
government to underplay its involvement in the peace process in Afghanistan.
The reason for his doing so is the sharp reaction from Pakistan to any Indian
moves in Afghanistan. Indeed, this is nothing new. Similar requests have come
from the Afghan government in the past as well, but that is only a transitory
factor. In the best of Afghan interests and our relations with Afghanistan, we
need to manage this contradiction tactfully, as things are already looking up
for Indian interests in Afghanistan. A solution is not around the corner and
the new announcement of enhanced withdrawal has made the situation more
difficult for Biden, but his election has gingered up the Afghan scenario in
the right direction.
https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/comment/biden-may-bode-well-for-afghan-peace-process-172431
------
URL: https://newageislam.com/indian-press/indian-press-interfaith-marriage-pakistan/d/123508
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic
Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism