Declaring Triple Talaq Illegal Akin To Rewriting Quran: New Age Islam's Selection, 29 March 2017
New Age Islam Edit Bureau
29 March 2017
• Declaring Triple Talaq Illegal Akin To Rewriting Quran
By Dhananjay Mahapatra
• Gains in Reaching Out To Moderate Taliban
By Ashok K Mehta
• My Burkha Vs Yours: Exploring the Mystery of Which ‘Particular’ Community Pahlaj Nihalani Is Protecting
By Radhika Vaz
• Here’s why China Is Blocking Attempts to Designate JuD Chief ‘Global Terrorist’
By Shishir Gupta
• Battle for Mosul
By Sankar Sen
Compiled By New Age Islam Edit Bureau
----
Declaring Triple Talaq Illegal Akin To Rewriting Quran
By Dhananjay Mahapatra
Mar 28, 2017
Taking a hardline religious stand, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB ) told the Supreme Court on Monday that if triple Talaq mode of divorce was declared illegal, it would amount to disregarding Allah's directions and rewriting of the Holy Quran to force Muslims into committing sin.
Stressing that personal law provisions enjoyed sanctity under the Constitution's Article 25 (right to profess and practice a religion of choice), the AIMPLB said, "If such casual denunciation of the verses of the holy book is permitted, then soon Islam would cease to exist. Though triple Talaq in one sitting is an unusual mode of divorce in Islam, it cannot be declared to be invalid in the light of the direct verses of Holy Quran and categorical command of the Messenger of Allah."
Explaining that triple Talaq was mandated by the Holy Quran, AIMPLB in its written submission three days before the final hearing on the matter, said the holy book ordained that "once three pronouncements of Talaq are made, the wife becomes unlawful or 'Haram' to her former husband, unless the process of 'Halala' takes place in its natural course". "The pronouncement of the third Talaq and its irrevocability is explicitly given in Quran. In such circumstances, it is forbidden for the former husband to take the wife back in marriage again, unless she marries another person of her choice and such marriage comes to an end owing to death or by divorce... The objective is to enable a divorcee woman to remarry out of her own free will and choice," the AIMPLB said through advocate Ejaz Maqbool.
Telling the SC that it had no power to scrutinise the legality of personal law provisions, the board said, "Any deviation from such Quranic injunction (validity of triple Talaq) would go against the mandate of the Almighty himself and such an act would be going against the very integral practice of Islam and would be disregarding the precise directions of Allah and also his Messenger, which is nothing but a sin and as per the Holy Quran, such an action would show that the believer has strayed away from the religion in manifest error.
"Furthermore, as ordained by the Holy Quran, all Muslims are bound to accept the command of the Messenger and are bound to avoid whatever the Messenger forbids and when the Prophet has categorically directed separation of parties after triple Talaqin one go and has ruled that if the former husband takes the woman back into marriage, he will be committing a sin, then no believer has a choice to take the woman back into marriage after pronouncing triple Talaqand such an act is nothing but a sin."
Warning of serious consequences of disobeying the Quran, the AIMPLB said, "The consequences of committing such a sin would be far more adverse as children born out of such relationship would be illegitimate and their rights of inheritance in their putative father's estate would be questionable."
"In view of this, if the Supreme Court holds that triple Talaqin one sitting is not a valid form of effecting divorce, then that would amount to rewriting of the Holy Quran itself, which is nothing but the ipissima verba (the precise words) of the Almighty himself and is the entire genesis of Islam. Such an alteration of the specific verses of the Holy Quran would actually amount to altering the very essence of the religion of Islam."
Source: timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/aimplb-to-sc-declaring-triple-talaq-illegal-akin-to-rewriting-quran/articleshow/57863225.cms
----
Gains in Reaching Out To Moderate Taliban
By Ashok K Mehta
29 March 2017
As sought by President Ghani, UNSC must activate a non-interference mechanism for verification of frontier activities. Rawalpindi, on its part, must help fight the real enemy and not create a smokescreen of the IS
This month, the United National Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 2344 (2017) extended the mandate of United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan by another year, making it America’s longest war of choice. Ever since the US and the the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) drawdown at the end of 2014, and Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) took full charge of security, the Afghans appear to be under pressure. They called 2015 the year of setbacks and 2016 the worst year in terms of casualties and attrition.
Afghanistan’s National Security Advisor Mohammad Hanif Atmar, last month in New Delhi, said that ANSF, on an average was suffering 28 fatalities daily. In comparison, the counter-terror campaign in Jammu & Kashmir is a cakewalk. In 2007, Indian security forces lost 122 personnel, 12 in 2012 and last year, 95 combatants. The fall of Sangin, the lynchpin district in Helmand Province this month, shows how fluid the situation is. While US Special Inspector General for Reconstruction’s latest report indicates that 57.2 per cent of 407 district are under Afghan control or influence, Gen John Nicholson, Commander, Operation Resolute Force, says 70 per cent of Afghan population lives in areas under Government control.
During this year’s Raisina Dialogue, former Afghan Intelligence chief, Amrullah Saleh, described the security situation as militarily containable but in a bloody stalemate that required to be broken. He said that the new Taliban leadership was in Lahore, not Quetta, presumably pushed into the hinterland fearing US drone strikes after the elimination of Afghan Taliban leader Akhtar Mansour last year inside Pakistan.
Atmar said Afghanistan and Pakistan had exchanged lists of 86 and 76 terrorists plus 32 training centres in Pakistan. Kabul wanted Islamabad to act against them and so will Kabul but with a third party verification mechanism. After initially pivoting towards Pakistan, Afghanistan President Ashraf Ghani is a bitter critic of Pakistan, accusing it of waging an undeclared war by covertly supporting terrorist networks, including the Taliban.
At the Heart of Asia conference in New Delhi last year, he demanded an Asian or international regime acceptable to Pakistan to verify frontier activities, including terrorist operations. This is akin to asking for a UN-sponsored and monitored non-interference mechanism to name and shame intruding entities and countries.
The Kabul Government has taken off its gloves and publicly named Pakistan for cross-border terrorism. The latest attacks were made at UNHRC in Geneva followed by the Boao Forum in China. Already, Gen Nicholson, Sen John McCain and Defence Secretary James Mattis, have noted that as long as insurgents and senior leaders enjoy safe havens in Pakistan, they have no incentive to reconcile.
Atmar said that Pakistan “had lied to us about peace talks”. Like others, he is waiting for the Trump Administration to announce its Afghanistan policy, which may contain a new military surge and a strategy to deal with terrorist sanctuaries in Pakistan, including the more liberal employment of lethal drones as part of coercive diplomacy to make Rawalpindi act against the Taliban-Haqqani network.
Meanwhile, Atmar, in a reply to a question at the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses conference, said that US-trained Afghan Special Forces are one of the best in the world and “we will take the war to sanctuaries wherever they may be”. No Afghan leader has ever made such a bold public statement of intent. Kabul has obviously been inspired by the Indian Army’s surgical strikes in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.
A recent Royal United Services Institute study by Theo Farrell and Michael Semple says that the Taliban movement (approximately 40,000 fighters) is in disarray with its leader Maulawi Haibatullah Akhundzada weak and ineffective and with several factions vying for power. The battlefield successes of 2016 have come at very high cost.
Disaffection about war, division over peace talks, and the independent operations of the Mansour faction in Helmand were complicating any cohesive response in war and peace strategies. Taliban spokesperson Zabiullah Mujahid has said no reconciliation till foreign troops leave Afghanistan as our fight is for independence which suggests no change from the old line “while the Americans may have the watches, the Taliban have the time”.
Dissent and discord among the Taliban have benefited the Islamic State (IS). Rawalpindi has consistently maintained it has only limited control, not influence over the Taliban. According to Afghan and US sources, IS presence has reportedly reduced from control of seven to 10 districts to two to three districts in Nangarhar with its fighting strength pegged at 1,500-3,000; another 200 IS in Kunar Province.
Atmar says the ISIS is a mutation and morphing of the Taliban, Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan and others — simply rebranding as no IS has come from Iraq or Syria. But the Hamid Karzai confident Aimal Faizi says some may be escapees from there. The failure of the Quadrilateral Contact Group and other non-Government peace initiatives appears to have given birth to a new political grouping led by Russia and China which unsurprisingly includes Pakistan, had initially excluded Afghanistan and kept the US out but after the initial Moscow meeting now has Iran, Turkey and India also on board.
Lifting of sanctions on the Taliban was ostensibly a key item of the agenda though the real purpose was doing a strategic somersault on the threat: Switching the centre of gravity from the Taliban to IS. A IS video sent to Beijing claimed Chinese Uighur Muslims would shed “blood like rivers” in Xinjiang. Similarly, Moscow fears that its three to 5,000 Muslims in Syria will return and set up base in Afghanistan affecting its back yard, Central Asia. Creating the bogey of IS is the new strategy. Russia and China, two countries, which have no troops on the ground and give little economic aid to Afghanistan, have begun calling the shots on who the real enemy is. Atmar says the idea, that the Taliban will fight IS, is baloney. But Moscow and Beijing with Rawalpindi’s goading are attempting to alter the agenda. The Afghans, Americans and Indians will oppose the idea of making foe into friend. Breaking the bloody stalemate in battle of attrition in which Kabul is daily losing 28 soldiers is necessary. A US and Nato military surge in Afghanistan, one hopes, will be the outcome of the Nato summit in May, which President Trump will attend.
Surgical strikes by Afghan Special Forces against terrorist sanctuaries across the Durand Line will be the first step in dismantling safe havens. The UNSC must activate the non-interference mechanism sought by Ghani. Rawalpindi should help fight the real enemy rather than create the smokescreen of IS. The new Director General Inter-Services Intelligence, Lt Gen Naveed Mukhtar’s US War College researched plan to accommodate moderate Taliban in Kabul Government is worth pursuing. He should get them to the talks table.
Source: dailypioneer.com/columnists/edit/gains-in-reaching-out-to-moderate-taliban.html
----
My Burkha Vs Yours: Exploring the Mystery of Which ‘Particular’ Community Pahlaj Nihalani Is Protecting
By Radhika Vaz
March 28, 2017
An Indian movie, made by an Indian woman, about Indian women has been banned by an Indian man. This type of blatant misogyny can only be Make in India!
Now unless you have been living under a rock you know that Pahlaj Nihalani and his friends at CBFC have banned ‘Lipstick under my burkha’ – a film about four Indian women. The film is brilliant; i watched it at the Miami International Film Festival where the organisers hurriedly added extra screenings because they were selling out so fast. That isn’t all – the film has been winning Grand Jury, Audience and Best Actress awards at practically every international film festival it has been screened at. But in order for Indian people to watch this film in India Alankrita Shrivastava, the film’s director, has had to fight the Indian censor board to have it released.
Winning this fight is important because it is the only way to fight the patriarchy, and no matter which way you cut it (pun intended) the decision to ban the film is a patriarchal one. When you wilfully silence a woman’s point of view you support a culture of gender inequality and that makes you look less like men of the arts and more like a bunch of back alley abortion doctors who kill female foetuses for a living.
Of course CBFC has a reason for banning the movie. They claim the film will offend the sentiments of a ‘particular’ community. I wondered what community they were referring to. It can’t possibly be the Muslim community; after all here we are merrily blocking any attempt to reconstruct the Babri Masjid. With that in mind it is almost comical that we think a film can do more damage to a community’s feelings!
So, could it possibly be the Hindu community that Mr Nihalani and company are concerned with? Two of the characters are indeed Hindu and the honest portrayal of how these women are treated, by their families and society at large, may actually be quite the eye opener. Perhaps it is this majority community that the CBFC is trying to protect? Maybe they don’t want anyone to take note of the fact that regardless of religion, in India all women are kept under a burkha – something they have clearly tried to do with this movie itself. And for the propagation of women’s rights let’s hope they haven’t succeeded.
DISCLAIMER: Views expressed above are the author's own.
Source: blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/read-it-and-weep/my-burkha-vs-yours-exploring-the-mystery-of-which-particular-community-pahlaj-nihalani-is-protecting/
----
Here’s why China Is Blocking Attempts To Designate Jud Chief ‘Global Terrorist’
By Shishir Gupta
Mar 27, 2017
The umbilical cord between Maulana Masood Azhar and the Taliban, now headed by Hibatullah Akundzada, with a common enemy in the US, is the key to China’s plans in the Af-Pak region.(AFP)
Three days before China blocked the United Nations Security Council’s attempts to designate Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM)’s Maulana Masood Azhar as a global terrorist under the 1267 committee on December 30, 2016, representatives of Beijing, Moscow and Islamabad held a meeting on Afghanistan and raised Cain over looming threat of Islamic State (IS) over Kabul.
Two months later, another meeting was held, this time joined by India, Afghanistan and Iran. In the second meeting, it became clear to New Delhi and Kabul that Beijing backed by others wanted Taliban to play an important role in the stabilisation of Afghanistan by taking on the exaggerated threat of IS after the withdrawal of US troops.
The importance of Maulana Masood Azhar lay in the fact that he continued to be close to both the Taliban leadership as well as the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) since the 1990s. The Afghan Taliban and JeM are both Deobandi Sunnis and follow Hanafi school of Islamic jurisprudence and have a long history together starting from jihadist teachers at Karachi’s Binori Mosque.
Letting NSG and Masood Azhar get in the way of Indo-China ties. Is it worth it?
When Masood Azhar was released in exchange of hostages aboard Indian Airlines A-300 Airbus in the December 1999 (IC-814) hijacking at Kandahar airport, he was hugged by Mullah Akhtar Mansour, then Taliban minister of civil aviation and who later succeeded Mullah Omar as the emir of Taliban in 2015 and killed an year later in US drone strike.
The fact is that Masood Azhar returned to Pakistan after his release and then was taken to Kandahar by Mullah Mansour to meet Mullah Omar in January 2000. Even before he formed JeM terrorist group in Bahawalpur, Pakistan, Azhar was general secretary of Harkat-ul-Ansar (HUA) with claimed cadre strength of over 10,000 people.
During an interrogation at Kot Bhalwal jail in Jammu after he was arrested outside Srinagar in February 1994, Azhar used to boost that his organisation may have started with the help of ISI but subsequently grew independent with over 10,000 followers.
The umbilical cord between Azhar and the Taliban, now headed by Hibatullah Akundzada, with a common enemy in US is the key to China’s plans in the Af-Pak region.
China to ‘consider all aspects’ before backing ban on Masood Azhar: Official
By protecting Azhar from global terrorist label, China is buying peace for the restive Xinjiang region from Uighurs, trained and sheltered by Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) in Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) of Pakistan as well as its growing business interests in Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan regions of that country.
Even though some TTP commanders have announced allegiance to IS, the brutal group is largely Deobandi in thought with jihadists’ linkage to Masood Azhar going back to the HUA days in Afghan war.
Both China and Pakistan are well aware of the role Azhar can play in helping Taliban recapturing power in Afghanistan against common enemies in US and India in the region.
In spite the fact that JeM single-handedly scuttled the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s peace overtures to his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif by launching the January 2016 Pathankot air base attack, both Islamabad and Beijing are on the same page in protecting Azhar and his jihadist machinery from sanctions.
The UN terrorist label will not only restrict the movement of Azhar but also hit at the financial funding of the JeM and the Bahawalpur madrasa.
This was also severely hampering Maulana’s capabilities with the Quetta Shura of Taliban, thus nixing China’s play in Af-Pak region.
Afghanistan has been the graveyard for empires with British, Soviets and US tasting defeat in the hardy terrain. Hope Beijing has read modern history of Afghanistan.
Source: hindustantimes.com/opinion/here-s-why-china-is-blocking-attempts-to-designate-jud-chief-global-terrorist/story-SBFPuQl9IOvlb0MjY68jAI.html
-----
Battle for Mosul
By Sankar Sen
March 29, 2017
Iraq’s Prime Minister, Haider-al-Abadi, had once vowed to recapture Mosul, the country’s second largest city of Iraq, from the control of ISIS by the end of 2016. American military commanders, assisting the Iraqi troops, were also quite optimistic, and hoped that the victory would be swift. But this has not actually happened. It bears recall that ISIS had captured Mosul in June 2014 when Iraqi troops literally broke up and fled. There was a nightmarish fear that ISIS troops would march ahead and storm the capital, Baghdad. Now after two-and-a-half years, the tide has turned and the Caliphate is on the retreat. The Iraqi security forces are in control of Qyaarah airport, some forty miles south of Mosul. It has now been refurbished and has become the logistical base and the collecting point for the Iraqi forces gathering for the attack. At least 600 American advisors and Special Forces are training and guiding the Iraqis in their operations.
It now seems that the ability of the jihadists to hold on and cause indiscriminate damage was overlooked by the security forces. They underestimated the capability of the militants to cause damage and carnage. The jihadists have successfully used booby traps, improvised landmines and hundreds of suicide bombers to hold back the advance of the Iraqi forces. Elaborate tunnel networks in west Mosul have enabled the militants to launch surprise attacks on the Iraqi forces in areas supposedly cleared... and then escape. In the ongoing Mosul operations, the Iraqi forces have suffered heavy casualties and the Government so far has not released the casualty figures.
According to Michael Knight of the Washington Institute, an American think-tank, about 25,000 Iraqi army and Special Forces, are taking part in this operation. Another 6,000-strong Sunni tribal force has been recruited from the neighbouring areas, and is involved in this operation. Kurdish Peshmerga forces, as well as Shia People’s Liberation Force, are also ready to operate. They have not been involved so far in the operation for the recapture of Mosul, fearing an impact on the area’s Sunni population.
The Iraqi forces have already occupied the eastern part of the city, which is split in half by the Tigris river and the battle for occupation of the western part is raging. The battle is getting tougher as the old city’s narrow lanes and by-lanes enabled the suicide bombers and the snipers to prey on the Iraqi troops. Heavy fighting is also taking its toll on the civilian population. The Iraqi government has dropped leaflets urging the residents numbering about 7, 50,000 not to leave their homes. But given the siege-like condition, many will be forced to flee.
The Caliphate, however, is steadily losing ground and staring at inevitable defeat. With the intensification of air strikes, many bureaucrats are seeing the writing on the wall and have started to flee. The fall of Mosul will deal a severe blow to ISIS. It was from here that Al-Baghdadi, its leader, declared his Caliphate. It still has some strength left. It has a fanatical core of about 5000 battle-hardened Jihadis in west Mosul alone. They will give a tough fight, as they had earlier done in east Mosul. There are also a number of foreign fighters who know that they cannot blend into the native population and escape to Raqqa, the capital of the Caliphate across the border in Syria. They are prepared to fight to die. With the Kurdish-led ground forces advancing towards Raqqa, the fall of the capital is also a question of time. American commanders believe that the fall of Mosul and Raqqa will take place within six months.
ISIS is also in financial straits. Their collection of money through taxes, sale of oil and ransom has declined from $ 1.9 bn in 2014 to about $ 870 million in 2016, according to a study by King’s College, London. There are clear indications that the Caliphate’s short and brutal life is coming to an end.
In western Mosul, the Iraqi army has captured the airport, government complexes and all the roads in and out of the city. But even after the recapture of Mosul, there will be huge problems. Many of the citizens had collaborated with the occupiers and there is bound to be a settling of scores. Though the Shia-dominated Iraqi army has liberated the city, the Sunnis will demand a fair share of the power in the city and the neighbouring province of Nineveh. The Kurds will also claim their share of the recompense for breaking the back of ISIS. Again, rebuilding and reconstruction of Mosul will be a big task.
No battlefield victory against the Jihadis will be complete and no diplomatic solution will be enduring unless the serious dispossession of the Sunnis is dealt with. Prime Minster Al-Abadi has tried to reach out to the Sunnis and heal the sectarian wounds. Power has to be shared with the sect equitably. This may not happen overnight, but the process must start.
There is a fragile detente among the anti-ISIS forces and the problem will intensify with the collapse of the Caliphate. Iraqi government and Iraqi Kurds are very likely to break apart. Kurds took advantage of the situation in 2014 to grab extensive lands disputed between themselves and the Arabs. With the collapse of the Caliphate, the Iraqi government may want to take back the territories.
There remains the baffling problem of holding on to a war-ravaged hostile territory after the ISIS is overthrown. Further, breaking up of the Caliphate will not snuff out the appeal of the ISIS and its malevolent ideology. It will continue to fester in many collapsed and failed states stretching from Algeria to Pakistan. Lone wolf supporters of ISIS will continue to attack western targets. Recent attacks, such as the one on Westminster last week, have been claimed by ISIS as acts of reprisal against western countries.
Sankar Sen is Senior Fellow, Institute of Social Sciences; former Director General, National Human Rights Commission; former Director, National Police Academy.
Source: thestatesman.com/opinion/battle-for-mosul-1490729875.html
----
URL: https://www.newageislam.com/indian-press/declaring-triple-talaq-illegal-akin/d/110567