By New Age Islam Edit
Desk
2 November
2020
• Politicising Terrorism
By Muhammad Amir Rana
• Nothing Good To Report From This The Islamic
Republic Of Pakistan
By Yasser Latif Hamdani
• And Now The Punjabi Nationalism
By M Alam Brohi
• Second US Presidential Debate And Beyond
By Sabria Chowdhury Balland
-----
Politicising Terrorism
By Muhammad Amir Rana
01 Nov 2020
COUNTERING
the threat of terrorism requires accurate assessment, political resolve, a
long-term strategy, and, resilient and in-sync security and law-enforcement
structures. Terrorist movements strike back when given a moment to breathe. A
decline in terrorist violence has several reasons, but it is too early to
declare victory unless terrorist networks are completely dismantled.
The
terrorists apply both operational and political strategies to unnerve security
apparatuses. For instance, Baloch insurgent groups perpetrate small-scale
terrorist attacks and sabotage activities frequently and conduct major,
high-impact attacks sporadically. They may even ‘disappear’ for some time and
then carry out surprise attacks. In September, Baloch groups did not perpetrate
a single attack in the province, which created an impression of stabilisation,
but in October they struck back with lethal attacks.
Usually,
religiously inspired terrorist groups in Pakistan have enough human resources,
and intervals in their attacks could have other causes. However, when there are
breaks in terrorist violence, the government, political parties, and security
institutions seem relaxed or are confused about the threat. This gives the
terrorists some breathing space to plan and carry out more attacks. They know
when to manoeuvre political situations and add to the crisis.
A
significant upsurge during the last couple of weeks saw several incidents of
terrorism being reported from different parts of the country. The
Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan, Baloch insurgents, and violent sectarian groups
were reportedly involved in these attacks. The TTP targeted a military convoy with
a remote-controlled blast in the Razmak area of North Waziristan in which six
army soldiers including a captain were martyred. In Balochistan, BRAS, an
alliance of Baloch insurgent groups, targeted a convoy of security forces
escorting OGDCL employees from Gwadar to Karachi. Seven FC soldiers and as many
private security guards were martyred.
Terrorist Groups Thrive In Times Of Political
Crises.
In another
incident, terrorists opened fire on a patrolling party of security forces
southeast of Turbat. However, two other attacks created the impression that
terrorism had returned. While one of these attacks took place in a Peshawar
madressah, causing several casualties and fear, the other targeted civilians in
Hazarganji, Quetta, at a time when an opposition rally was underway a few
kilometres away.
Unfortunately,
the treasury and opposition exploit such attacks for political purposes. Some
believe the government uses ‘security alerts’ as a tool to create fear among
the political workers of the opposition parties. Many in the Pakistan
Democratic Movement built conspiracy theories around these attacks. At the same
time, once again, the externalisation factor, or involvement of a foreign hand,
in these attacks was exploited out of proportion.
The
militant landscape of the country is complex. For one, the TTP’s operational
strength has increased manifold after its former splinter groups and several
other small militant groups and commanders recently merged with it. It is
evident that the militants have been increasing their presence and activities
in the tribal districts for several months now. While our counterterrorism
focus was waning, militants wasted no time in exploiting this mistake. In
recent times, TTP militants taking shelter in Afghanistan have regularly
carried out attacks in the Waziristan districts, either by crossing the border
or through their operatives present in parts of the tribal districts.
Similarly,
the terrorist threat from Al Qaeda and the militant Islamic State (IS) group
still looms large in the region. Communal and sectarian violence is on the rise
and of late, sectarian tensions have also flared. The recent incidents of
sectarian violence, however, have more than a local context. The country has
been in the throes of sectarian tension since the month of Muharram when Shia
and Sunni clerics indulged in sectarian-related hate speech.
In this
backdrop, underrating the terrorism threat is nothing short of daydreaming. An
examination of the blast in Peshawar’s Zubairiya madrasa is enough to
understand the gravity and complexity of the terrorist threat. The principal
Sheikh Rahimullah Haqqani is an Afghan national. A graduate of the leading
Deobandi, Hanafi madrasa Jamia Haqqania, Akora Khattak, he has a history of
sectarian confrontation with those subscribing to the Salafi sect. This has led
him to oppose IS. Some unconfirmed reports indicate his close association with
the Afghan Taliban, which, if true, make his animosity with IS understandable.
IS is
suspected to be behind the attack, though it has not accepted responsibility;
the group has also not found to have been involved in any terrorist activity
for the last four years in the city. If IS were involved in the attack, it
would mean that a new threat has emerged in KP’s capital city. The TTP has
condemned the attack for obvious reasons of sectarian affinity with the
madressah, but in recent months it has been using IEDs effectively in its
terrorist operations. It is not an exclusive tactic or weapon of choice for the
TTP, and there are many other criminal and sectarian groups, and hostile
foreign agencies that use it; such devices are even used in tribal and family
feuds.
If IS or
TTP were not involved in the attack, it would have been an isolated one. But
the increasing operational capabilities of the TTP cannot be ignored.
Interestingly, the TTP has refuted the security alerts issued by the National
Counter Terrorism Authority about the possible targeting of the opposition
parties’ leadership and their rallies. This could be seen as a political
gimmick played by the TTP to exacerbate the ongoing political crisis in the
country. Terrorist groups thrive in times of political crises, when their
narrative becomes more attractive to frustrated and marginalised segments of
society. A unified TTP would not only concentrate on the revival of its
operational capabilities but also try and regain the political legitimacy of
its narrative.
The
political overplay with regard to security-related issues both by the
government and opposition will only benefit the terrorists. Politicising
threats will affect the morale and capacity of police and the counterterrorism
departments, and lead them to avoid investigation of terrorism incidents
blaming the external forces for them.
-----
Muhammad Amir Rana is a security analyst.
https://www.dawn.com/news/1587959/politicising-terrorism
-----
Nothing Good To Report From This The Islamic
Republic Of Pakistan
By Yasser Latif
Hamdani
November 2,
2020
As usual
there is nothing positive to report from this the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
Week after week it is the same story. We find a way to stoop lower in terms of
just common decency. The Arzoo case is most tragic. The 13 year old Christian
girl was first abducted from her house and forcefully converted. Then she was forcibly
married off to her abductor. It must be remembered that the Sindh law states
that a girl has to be 18 years or more to marry and below 16 years any
intercourse is statutory rape. While a fake birth certificate was produced
which showed her to be 18 years of age, the NADRA record shows her to be 13
years of age. A cursory look at Arzoo’s picture shows use that girl does not
even look 16 let alone 18 years of age.
The matter
eventually landed into the Sindh High Court at Karachi through a writ petition
filed by Arzoo against the police action against her and her “husband”. The
High Court ruled: “”The petitioner initially belonged to the Christian
religion. However, after the passage of time, the petitioner understood and
realized that Islam is a universal religion and she asked her parents and other
family members to embrace Islam but they flatly refused. Subsequently she
accepted the religion of Islam before the religious person of
MadressahJamiaIslamia. After embracing Islam, her new name is ArzooFaatima; per
learned counsel petitioner contracted her marriage to Azhar of her own free
will and accord without duress and fear.” The court also instructed the police
to stop harassing the newly wed bride. It seems that the court has disregarded
the NADRA record altogether.
Thankfully
there is no apostasy law in Pakistan yet but it exists de facto if not de jure.
Religious freedom is not a one-way street just as freedom of speech cuts both
ways
This
judgment violates the Child Marriages Restraint Act 1929. It must be remembered
that one of the active supporters of the Act was none other than Mr Jinnah,
standing up against trenchant opposition from his own community. It was here
that Jinnah famously stated that if his constituency was unable to support his
measure, the clearest duty on his part was to ask them to elect someone else.
For Jinnah the issue hit home because he had married18-year-oldRuttie when he
was 42 years of age and the marriage ended 10 years in a great tragedy given
the age gap between two. He loved his wife dearly but years after her untimely
demise Jinnah regretfully mourned that Ruttie had been just a child compared to
him and that he should have never married her, calling it his mistake. There
was of course a second mistake he made and realised at the very end of his life
but there is no point getting into that.
Obviously
if a person can vote at 18 years of age and enter into contracts, they should
be allowed to marry. Such marriages however should be actively discouraged.
Similarly conversion to another religion should not be allowed till one is 18
years of age. Layered upon this is the sheer hypocrisy that while conversions
into Islam are justified as religious freedom but conversion out of Islam no
matter what their age is almost untenable in this the Islamic Republic.
Thankfully there is no apostasy law in Pakistan yet but it exists de facto if
not de jure. Religious freedom is not a one-way street just as freedom of
speech cuts both ways.
Speaking of
freedom of speech and religion, aBar Association in this land of ours has
invited a famous “Shaikh-ul-Hadith Allama” to speak to it on the occasion of a
Milad function a few days from now. We all know how that is going to turn out.
This particular “Shaikh-ul-Hadith Allama” is going to ask for the nuking of
France and abuse people in general including minorities and call Christians
“Chooras”. Of course as a freedom of speech absolutist one does not begrudge
the right of “Shaikh-ul-Hadith Allama” to spew as much as abusive hatred
against everyone, so long as Bar Association also opens up the floor for cross
examination of the “Shaikh-ul-Hadith Allama”. If one were to ask him pointed
questions, one would be lynched not just by his army of bigots but one’s own
brethren in the legal fraternity. Therefore as such the foul-mouthed cleric who
has abused the judiciary and the military in the past will be given the stage
to resort to his rhetoric. Imagine if Nawaz Sharif or Bilawal Bhutto were to
abuse the judiciary and the military. Their parties would be banned
immediately. Not the case with Mullahs like “Shaikh-ul-Hadith Allama”. During a
candid exchange, the president of the said body told me that “Shaikh-ul-Hadith
Allama” will stick to the topic i.e. “Namoos-e-Rasalat”. Almost anything can be
considered within the bounds of that topic. Such is the de facto restraint on
freedom of speech; I am scared of naming the “Shaikh-ul-Hadith Allama” or the
Bar Association in question in this article let alone attending the function
and asking “Shaikh-ul-Hadith Allama” questions.
So here is
a round up of another week in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. I hope, dear
reader, you have more hope for this country than I have.
-----
Yasser Latif Hamdani is an Advocate of the High
Courts of Pakistan
https://dailytimes.com.pk/684197/nothing-good-to-report/
-----
And Now The Punjabi Nationalism
By M Alam Brohi
November 2,
2020
The
regional nationalism has been the most prominent feature of political evolution
in Pakistan, though in some parts of the country particularly in Bengal, Sindh
and KPK, the nationalism was quite assertive even before the inception of the
country. A good part of Balochistan remained quasi-independent as a Khanate
during the British Raj. The Bengali nationalism gained momentum as a backlash
to the partition of Bengal in 1905. The Sindhi nationalism became more
assertive after the annexation of Sindh with the Bombay Presidency. The
Pakhtuns have always been a ferociously independent people as reflected by the
Afghan-British wars.
The new
country was territorially so constituted that only a federal structure of
governance with sufficient political and administrative autonomy to the
federating units as in all the modern Federations could have worked well in
building a nation united in diversity and for shared political and economic
aspirations. Barring the father of the nation, all the leaders who migrated
from different parts of India to take over power in the country were not so
familiar with the political aspirations, cultural and civilizational ethos of
the national entities that constituted the new federation of Pakistan. The
local leadership lost influence in the early days of the independent Pakistan,
and was gradually elbowed out of the governing lot.
The central
leadership got bogged down – particularly after the passing away of Mr. Jinnah
and the assassination of Liaqat Ali Khan – in political tussles, intrigues and
jockeying to the peril of nation building. The last straw on the camel’s back
came in the form of the concept of strong center or the unnatural and
inconceivable concept of coercive unity of peoples of heterogeneous cultures
and languages, and the disastrous imposition of One-Unit Scheme. This gave an
impetus to the latent sentiments of nationalism particularly in Bengal and the
three provinces of West Pakistan – Sindh, KPK and Balochistan.
Since
Punjab was having dominance in the security and bureaucratic establishment and
was more populated than the other constituents of West Pakistan but was devoid
of natural resources and Seaports, the Sindhi, Baloch and Pakhtun nationalists
had all the reasons to hold it responsible for their political and economic
woes. Even the Bengali nationalism was directed against it as the division of
economic and financial resources was carried out on the basis of the territory
– and not the population. Punjab undoubtedly took the bigger share of the
economic and financial resources and federal jobs and powerful bureaucratic and
military positions in Bengal and West Pakistan.
The
sentiments of nationalism have been largely pacified in the other three
provinces after the quantum of provincial autonomy guaranteed by the 18th
Amendment
This
situation did not change even after the secession of Bengal. The new rulers
switched to the division of economic and financial resources on the basis of
the population. The quantum of provincial autonomy in the 1973 Constitution was
nominal allowing Punjab greater dominance in the state affairs. So, in popular
term, Punjab continued to be the big brother – satisfied with its well established
position in the political and military-bureaucratic establishment and the
lion’s share of the economic and financial resources. The other three provinces
felt as merely cogs in the wheel of the state affairs.
Though
Bhutto always tried to woo the Punjabi political elite, the majority of the
Punjabi establishment resented his economic and administrative reforms. Even
then, his mass popularity in Punjab remained unaffected. Benazir Bhutto
inherited this popularity standing bravely to the repression of dictator Zia ul
Haq. After Zia, for the first time in the history of the country, the Punjabi
establishment felt threatened from the soaring popularity of Benazir Bhutto in
Punjab in the run up to the general elections of 1988 and the likely retributive
justice she was suspected to institute to avenge her father’s judicial murder.
At the
behest of his promoters in the establishment, the young Chief Minister of
Punjab, Mian Nawaz Sharif raised the slogan of Punjabism – ‘Jag Punjabi Jag,
Lage na Teri pag noon dagh’ which echoed throughout his election campaign. His
language against the Bhuttos was unusually foul, derogatory and abusive calling
the senior Bhutto as traitor and the Bhutto ladies as stooges of foreign
powers. The election was marginally won by the PPP. However, Benazir Bhutto
publicly claimed that her party was deprived of a block of 25 National Assembly
seats to prevent her from winning absolute majority. This was later confirmed
by the confessional statement of General Asad Durrani for distribution of funds
among the anti PPP politicians including Mian Nawaz Sharif at the behest of
General Aslam Beg.
Though Mian
Nawaz failed in his bid to capture the premiership of the country, he saved his
throne in Lahore due mainly to the help of the establishment which connived
with him in the Chhanga Manga operation. The Provincial Assembly members
including the independents were bussed to the nearby resort, lavishly hosted
there and brought back to Lahore on the day when the Leader of House was elected.
However, he had sowed the seed of nationalism in Punjab. The outlook of Punjabi
voter could not remain unaffected by this new nationalist approach in politics
of Punjab which greatly eroded the roots of Sindh-based PPP.
Years
after, the Punjabi nationalism once again raised its ugly head when a senior
PML (N) leader identified the arrest of Shahbaz Sharif by the NAB as an attack
on the honour of Punjab and Punjabis. The PPP has been facing arrests since
1977 but has never identified them with the honour of Sindh or Sindhis. The
senior Bhutto suffered immeasurably at the hands of a tyrant. Throughout his
ordeal, he behaved as a national leader and even died as a national leader. It
is, therefore, unbecoming of the PML (N) leaders to identify their leaders with
Punjab which represents the security and bureaucratic establishment and enjoys
institutional dominance in the country.
The
sentiments of nationalism have been largely pacified in the other three
provinces after the quantum of provincial autonomy guaranteed by the
18thAmendment. Therefore, it looks ridiculous to stoke Punjabi nationalism when
this dispute has been settled constitutionally.
------
M Alam Brohi was a member of the Foreign
Service of Pakistan and he has authored two books
https://dailytimes.com.pk/684196/and-now-the-punjabi-nationalism/
-----
Second US Presidential Debate And Beyond
By Sabria Chowdhury
Balland
November 2,
2020
The second
US presidential debate now being over, the only step left in knowing the
results in one of the most consequential elections in our lifetime will be on
November 3. Fifty million Americans have already voted early. The last debate
was thus a last chance for the candidates to make their cases to undecided
voters.
The more
time that passes, the more the United States becomes divided, polarized and
bipartisan. We bear the identity of the political party we support, for good or
bad, like wearing a badge of honor or bearing a cross. We are identified by our
political views and values. Declaring being a Democrat automatically conjures
up preconceived notions in others’ minds, as does declaring being a Republican.
Most Americans are oblivious to the fact that in some respect Democrats and
Republicans are more similar than they are different but watching the last
presidential debate on October 22, a viewer would not have noticed that.
A large
section of the electorate, even some Republicans, want a change from the
tumultuous four years we have experienced. It has been one rollercoaster ride
after the other, continuous changes within the administration with people being
fired and imprisoned. We have become accustomed to learning about the latest
White House decisions from the president’s Twitter feed and this has taken a
significant toll on Americans.
Former
President Obama recently said, “But the thing is, this is not a reality show,
this is reality. And the rest of us have had to live with the consequences of
him (President Trump) proving himself incapable of taking the job seriously.”
This sums it up.
The last
debate was much more of substance and poised than the first one (mostly because
of the muted mics for the person whose turn it was not to speak) and we were
able to view the contrasts between the two presidential candidates even more
clearly.
From what
we can gather from President Trump’s outlook for a possible second term, there
will be nothing really new. We know that he plans on unrolling “a beautiful
healthcare plan” which we have been hearing since his first campaign in 2016.
We have yet to see it.
The
president, in all his self-praise, told us that not since Abraham Lincoln (who
freed the slaves after the Civil War) has there been a president who has done
more for the African American community. We have yet to learn what that is.
We were
given absolutely no responses as to how he could sign an executive order which
became the Muslim ban or how his administration could lock up children in cages
at the US-Mexico border. The authorities are now unable to locate the parents
of over 500 of these children but we were given no viable explanations or
assurances. We were given no explanations about the plans that will replace (or
not) the Paris Climate Agreement, what our role in Nato will be, how the
exponential rise in Covid-19 will be tackled, why the president has not
exercised more authority to urge Congress to quickly pass the pandemic relief
stimulus bill that millions of vulnerable Americans are waiting for, the list
goes on.
What we
heard is a president who refused to take ownership for his mistakes,
continually complimented himself and provided absolutely no roadmap to what
Americans can expect, looking forward to the next four years. That is certainly
because the next four years under a Trump presidency will be much of the same
uncertainty and chaos. We will have to continue with our eyes glued to our
president’s Twitter feed to learn about what he plans to do next.
Some people
suggest that Trump is a better candidate because he is the only president in
recent years who has not been a war-monger. That is certainly a huge feather in
his cap but subjugation can be carried out without the use of weapons and boots
on the ground or drone attacks.
Trump’s
policies in the Middle East are discreet forms of Machiavellian manoeuvres
where the US brokers ‘peace deals’ between majority Muslim countries and
Israel. All this does is undermine the grave human rights abuses on the
Palestinians and crushes their hopes of a two-state solution. The ‘peace deals’
also ensure that the countries recognize Israel as a legitimate state, despite
Palestine’s issues. These deals do not qualify as ‘wars’ but they certainly do
not qualify as ‘peace deals’, either.
What was
observed by many Americans in both debates is that Joe Biden has been able to
hold his ground a great deal more than was originally expected. Anyone debating
against Donald Trump must be ready, willing and able to take the constant
punches, often drifting away from the real issues to personal insults. He
remained poised and presidential, even when attacked regarding his son’s
alleged corruption.
Joe Biden,
in contrast to his debate opponent, gave us a clear picture of what his plans
are for taxation, pandemic management, the environment, wages, healthcare,
immigration, and all the other issues which a prospective head of state is
supposed to be outlining to the electorate.
What many
outside the United States may not realize is that the Progressive Democratic
movement, supporters of socialist, left-leaning Bernie Sanders, are not fans of
the “corporate, establishment Democrats”, of which Biden is very much part of.
These are the more right-leaning members of the party, who are heavily financed
by the corporate sector and thus are inclined to vote on bills in Congress with
keeping their corporate donors satisfied. Joe Biden’s healthcare policies, for
example, are heavily influenced by the private health insurance and
pharmaceutical industries, which is one of the principle points of contention
between the Progressives and the establishment Democrats.
There were
many Progressives who, when Bernie Sanders withdrew from the campaign, were
extremely disappointed, undecided, unwilling to vote or had decided to vote for
the Green Party. Many have since shifted back to show support for the Joe
Biden-Kamala Harris ticket for three principal reasons: a Biden administration
means the end of a Trump administration, his choice of his running mate, his
continuity and stability.
In the last
few weeks, Joe Biden has managed to make Democrats – establishment and Progressives
– and many Republicans feel reassured. He and Kamala Harris give hope to the
soundness of a possible Biden administration.
Those who
said that a Biden presidency would be “boring” should appreciate the fact that
after the mayhem the United Sates (and frankly, the world) has experienced in
the last four years, ‘boring’ will be a very welcome change. If sustainability
and regaining our respect globally is ‘boring’, then so be it.
----
Sabria Chowdhury Balland is a teacher, writer,
political columnist and member of the US Democratic Party.
https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/737588-the-debate-and-beyond
-----
URL: https://newageislam.com/pakistan-press/pakistan-press-politicising-terrorism,-islamic/d/123339
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