Pakistan Press On Roots Of Extremism, Israeli Land Grab And Gilgit-Baltistan: New Age Islam's Selection, 23 January 2021
By New Age Islam Edit
Desk
23 January
2021
• Roots
Of Extremism
By Anjum Altaf
• Israeli Land Grab
The Dawn Editorial
• Gilgit-Baltistan: After The Elections
By Amir Hussain
• How Can Afghanistan Be Peaceful In 2021?
Dr Moonis Ahmar
• America — A Warning
By Farrukh Khan Pitafi
-----
Roots Of Extremism
By Anjum Altaf
January 21,
2021
DOES the
left hand know what the right one is doing? I was forced to ask this question
on being updated on recent measures to counter terrorism in the country.
I learnt
that the government has set up a commission “for implementation of national
narrative and development of structures against violent extremism and
radicalisation” one of whose objectives is “establishing a centre of excellence
to conduct degree and diploma courses in CVE [countering violent extremism] and
CT [countering terrorism]”. Another objective is “promoting awareness [of
extremism and terrorism] through print and electronic media, publications,
seminars, conferences, etc”.
This
reminded me of the bizarre state of modern medicine. If you go to a doctor with
a general malaise he/she would, if you are lucky, have your blood pressure
measured and, if it turns out high, would prescribe you a pill to take every
day to keep it under control. Ninety-nine times out of a hundred, the physician
would not bother to discover why your blood pressure is raised and so you will
be on a lifelong medication whose dosage would be progressively increased as
you grow older. Ditto for cholesterol, uric acid or anything else that might be
above the prescribed range. You will never be cured and meanwhile the drugs
would wreak all sorts of unknown damage on your body.
Now we will
be establishing centres of excellence to conduct degree and diploma courses in
CVE and CT which will be progressively upgraded to HEC-approved universities
with their own vice chancellors, provosts, registrars, etc all of whom would
have official residences, vehicles, POL and telephone allowances. Meanwhile,
friends and relatives would be wined and dined at international conferences and
study tours would be arranged to countries that have successfully done what we
have now so admirably set out to do.
Also, there
will not be a single word in the print and electronic media, publications,
seminars, conferences, etc about how we got saddled with the extremism and
terrorism that we have now set out to eradicate. Did they just drop out of the
sky? Or were they always with us ever since Aug 14, 1947? Or are they a test
that some divine power has devised for its followers who have to pass it by
fire to prove their worthiness?
As long as
there is no honest discussion of how we got this sickness, there will be little
hope for a cure. We won’t even know if we are serious in undoing the causes of
extremism and terrorism or if we are just going through the motions to tick off
a box on some checklist that has been handed down to us to regain good standing
in the international financial system of banking transactions.
I also
learnt that Nacta (National Counter Terrorism Authority) had drafted detailed
CVE policy guidelines in 2018 in which extremism was broadly defined as “having
absolute belief in one’s truth with an ingrained sense of self-righteousness”
which mindset was “likely to be accompanied with violence” to impose one’s
belief system.
Given this
definition of extremism, how do we square the setting up of a centre of
excellence to conduct degree and diploma courses in CVE and CT with the
curriculum that is intended at the school level to inject an absolute belief in
one’s truth with an ingrained sense of self-righteousness which, to repeat the
Nacta prognosis, is likely to be accompanied with violence to impose one’s
belief system?
To go back
to when and how extremism and then violence entered our society, can we not
discern a connection to the parallel attempt to impose a uniformity in our
thinking from early childhood with a heavy dose of an absolute belief in one’s
truth with an ingrained sense of self-righteousness — in other words to the
cradle-to-grave imposition of Pakistan Studies and some other subjects in our
educational institutions? And can we not put two and two together to see that
this was done to create the national narrative that would endorse and support
the conscious nurturing of extremism for equally admirable geopolitical
objectives?
The
objective conditions in Pakistan today are giving rise to broad trends of
conformity, rigid thinking, and loss of imagination that incline societies
towards extremism and violence. Everyone being made to learn and think the same
truth on pain of being declared anti-national can only yield an unreflecting
mass and a submissive society which is what authoritarian rulers drool over in
their dreams.
Thus we see
the paradox of a centre of excellence at the tertiary level to undo the damage
inflicted at the elementary level. The only question of interest is whether the
left hand knows what the right one is doing or whether both are clapping to the
same tune?
-----
Anjum Altaf is a former dean of the School of
Humanities and Social Sciences at Lums.
https://www.dawn.com/news/1602704/roots-of-extremism
----
Israeli Land Grab
The Dawn Editorial
January 23,
2021
WITH the
chapter now closed on the Trump presidency, the eyes of many in the
international community — particularly the Palestinians and all those who wish
to see a just settlement for them — will be on Washington to see if Joe Biden
can bring a semblance of neutrality to the Arab-Israeli dispute.
The Trump
era was of course one where Israel was given royal treatment by America, while
the Palestinians were treated with disdain. The so-called deal of the century,
a failed Trumpian solution to the dispute, was roundly rejected by the
Palestinians as it sought to reward Israel for its decades of land grabbing and
violence, and limit the Arabs to ‘reservations’ on their ancestral land.
However, with Mr Biden in the driving seat, there may be a change in tone, if
not substance, from Washington.
Israel, in
the meantime, seems committed to illegally devouring more and more Arab land
and creating ‘facts on the ground’. As reported by Israeli NGO Peace Now, Tel
Aviv has issued tenders for 2,500 settler homes in the occupied territories, a
move that is considered illegal under international law. The development is
apparently aimed at the Israeli election, due in March, as Benjamin Netanyahu
seeks to cling to power and fend off challenges to the premiership from
right-wing challengers by appeasing hard-line voters.
While on
the record Mr Biden has condemned Israeli settlements, members of his
administration have said there is no plan to reverse Donald Trump’s move to
recognise the disputed city of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. It would be naive
to hope for a complete turnaround in US policy in favour of the Palestinians as
Mr Biden as well as his vice president are committed Israel supporters, as are
most members of the American political establishment. However, it is hoped that
the new US leader will at least temper some of the more overtly pro-Israel
policies of his predecessor. Specifically, the expansion of illegal settlements
must end, while Israel’s brutal treatment of Palestinians, particularly its
frequent savage forays into Gaza, cannot continue.
The
two-state solution is indeed on life support, thanks largely to Israeli
impunity and America’s indulgence of its favourite Middle Eastern client. Yet
if the peace process is to be revived, then the Palestinians must get a fair
deal which promises them a viable state safe from the predatory attacks of
Israel. If this formula is ignored, more turbulence is in store for the region.
https://www.dawn.com/news/1603038/israeli-land-grab
-----
Gilgit-Baltistan: After The Elections
By Amir Hussain
January 22,
2021
The writer
is a social development and policy adviser, and a freelance columnist based in
Islamabad.
Amidst
claims and counter-claims of transparency and rigging, the general elections in
Gilgit-Baltistan (GB) took place in a relatively peaceful environment in all 24
constituencies of its legislative assembly.
It was for
the first time in the political history of GB that all the major political
parties of the country took part in a frantic election campaign run by their
top leadership. A month-long election campaign orchestrated by the PPP under
the leadership of Bilawal Bhutto set the political tone, which was then
followed by the PTI and PML-N both.
‘Following
the political euphoria of granting provincial status and determining the
political future for more internal autonomy, the people of GB once again proved
to be pragmatic in their political choice to go with the ruling party in the
federation’. This is the most frequently stated argument about the outcome of
GB general elections. Even the PTI leadership was quick to announce its victory
with this note of ‘conventional political pragmatism of the people of GB’ as a
key factor to win the elections.
The
political rationale of the victory thus articulated by the PTI leadership was
challenged by the PPP and PML-N on the ground of lack of transparency and what
they termed as ‘pre-poll rigging’ by the federal government. From the
perspective of ‘conventional political pragmatism’ the outcome of general
elections in GB has always been predictable and anyone with a modicum of
political sense could see the PTI as victorious.
However,
the inexorable political campaign by Bilawal Bhutto in the elections was seen
by many political pundits as an X factor to dislodge this conventional
pragmatism. It was believed that the PPP would bag at least 8 seats out of 24
because of the overwhelming response by people in political rallies. In the
longest ever election campaign of his political career, Bilawal Bhutto too
looked optimistic to form the government in GB. With his untiring journey on
the rough and bumpy roads far and wide in GB, Bilawal was not only able to
reconnect with the old disgruntled party workers (the jiyalas) but also
mobilized new support amongst the youth. Beyond the media images of big
rallies, there were also some widespread rumors of a possible deal between PPP
and the power corridors to form a government in GB.
However,
the situation started to gravitate more towards the ruling PTI with the prime
minister’s visit to GB on Nov 01, 2020 and his subsequent accouchement to make
GB the fifth province of Pakistan – though the statement of the prime minister
was seen by many as a political stunt to influence the outcome of the elections
because of the legal and political impediments and Pakistan’s official stance
on the dispute of Jammu and Kashmir. But Ali Amin Gandapur and Murad Saeed did
the trick through incentives and deals to garner the support of influential
locals and the people. This was termed as ‘pre-poll rigging’ by the opposition
and was challenged in the local courts by the PPP and the PML-N.
Protests
were also staged in front of the offices of the election commission and local
administration to dissuade the PTI from announcing economic and political
packages to influence election outcomes. None of these moves helped prevent the
PTI’s violation of the Election Act 2017, which restricts a ruling party and
its ministers from launching campaigns after the announcement of the election
schedule.
The PPP and
the PML-N claimed that the PTI’s continued violation of the Election Act 2017
and what they termed ‘visible rigging of election results in GBLA 2’ led to
some violent protests in Gilgit town and recounting of votes was deliberately
delayed. The defiance of PPP and PML-N workers against these irregularities
continued for many days which led to incidents of arson and the death of a
citizen during a mob frenzy.
The
elections, which otherwise remained peaceful for the most part, ended up
getting violent because of the controversial recounting of postal ballots.
Despite a prolonged public campaign, the PPP and PML-N could only win five
seats together (PPP three and PML-N two) against the 16 seats of the PTI to the
chagrin of those who hoped that the ‘ conventional pragmatism of GB’ , would
not be the norm this time.
Many
political analysts, nonetheless, missed out on an important dimension during
the GB elections’ debate – the institutional and structural relationship of the
federal government and GB, which is governed by financial dependence and
resource centralism. GB neither has the financial revenues nor the political
capacity to enter into a partnership deal with the federal government or demand
some sort of reciprocity under its current mode of governance. However, it is
important to note that this mountainous region of the country is full of
resources which can be harnessed to generate immense revenues in particular
from hydropower generation, mining and tourism – to mention a few.
There are
studies which say that GB has the hydropower potential of some 50,000 megawatts
which can resolve Pakistan’s chronic energy crisis and can save billions of
dollars currently spent on oil import for power generation. In 2020, some 1.5
million domestic and foreign tourists visited GB despite the poor communication
and accommodation infrastructure. The actual tourism potential of GB is much
higher, and it could become one of the most lucrative revenue generation industries
if the government invests to improve tourism infrastructure.
The geology
of GB contains large deposits of minerals including metallic, non-metallic,
energy minerals, precious and dimension stones, and rocks of varying industrial
value. The mining industry can bring billions of dollars to the national
exchequer if high-value Topaz, Peridot, Emerald, Morganite, and Tourmaline are
extracted from the mountains of GB. In addition to this, surveys also suggest
that there is a variety of rock formations in GB which contain a large amount
of precious metals like Gold, Gypsum, Chalcopyrite and Uranium.
GB’s
perennial issue of economic dependence and its corollary – political
subordination – can be overcome only through long-term investments in these key
sectors of economic growth. The current peripheral political relationship and
financial dependence on the central government can be reversed if the local
leadership starts taking the onus of policy formulation for inclusive
development. The GB government must engage sector specialists and policy
experts to devise a roadmap of 30 years for socioeconomic transformation and
inclusive growth from indigenous resources.
Many
political experts believe that the Lilliputian politics of the PTI’s national
leadership has been counterproductive for the development of the country but
one hopes that the newly formed government in GB starts thinking big. The chief
minister of GB and his team has to go a long way to address the longstanding
issues of unemployment, malnourishment, poor rural connectivity, energy crisis
and climate change.
There is no
magic bullet or fanciful shortcut to overcome the mounting problems of GB but
the region needs policies to start moving in the right direction. The key
sectors of economic growth and development must be governed by legal and policy
instruments rather than the ad-hoc arrangements of short-term economic and
political gains.
https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/777621-gilgit-baltistan-after-the-elections
------
How Can Afghanistan Be Peaceful In 2021?
By Dr Moonis Ahmar
January 22,
2021
If the year
2020 marked a breakthrough in US-Taliban negotiations leading to the signing of
the Doha Accord on February 27, and the unleashing of intra-Afghan dialogue,
the year 2021 will be quite challenging if during the first 100 days of the
Biden-Kamala administration, American forces remain in Afghanistan and there is
no positive development in talks between the Taliban and the Afghan government.
Since
September 2020, the US Special Representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation,
Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, has been regularly visiting Islamabad, Kabul and
Delhi in order to give an impetus to the Afghan peace process. During his visit
to Islamabad in early January 2021, he met the Chief of Army Staff and other high-ranking
Pakistani officials while expecting Islamabad to play a significant role in
persuading the Taliban to help form an interim government which can pave the
way for the ownership of the Afghan peace process and total withdrawal of
foreign forces from Afghanistan. Why is Khalilzad — who was also the US
ambassador to Iraq and Afghanistan, and as an Afghan-origin American official
is an old guard ensuring US interests in the war-torn country — frequently
visiting Pakistan? What are his intensions for the periodic meetings with
high-ranking Pakistani officials? Will the Biden-Kamala administration retain
him as a top negotiator for Afghanistan or will he be replaced?
Khalilzad,
who had his schooling in Kabul, left Afghanistan for the US in 1970s and after studying
in various American universities joined the State Department during mid-1980s.
Fluent in Pashto and Dari, he has played a pivotal role in convincing the
Taliban leadership during negotiations in Doha to reach an agreement with the
US to not attack American forces in Afghanistan and not allow Afghan soil to be
used for terrorism against America; and in return he gained consent from the
Trump administration for the total withdrawal of American forces from
Afghanistan. Even then, violence has continued in Afghanistan and there is a
question mark about the durability of the US-Taliban Doha Accord in the
Biden-Kamala administration because of two main reasons.
First, the
Doha agreement was reached after bypassing the Kabul regime and second, because
of the reservations held by NATO allies and the Pentagon about the total
withdrawal of American/foreign forces from Afghanistan out of fear that the
vacuum will lead to a fresh outbreak of violence and another of civil war.
In a
country like Afghanistan which is 200 years older than Pakistan and has not
been able to settle down as a nation state, the root cause of unabated violence
is the fragmented state and society of that country. Lack of common ground to
pull Afghanistan from decades of instability and armed conflicts is because of
the divisive culture and mindset which promotes disunity instead of
cohesiveness and coexistence. Had this not been the case, the Taliban and other
Afghan groups representing various interests would have agreed to resolve
issues peacefully instead of trying to impose their will and ideology on
others. It is this internal discord and polarisation in Afghanistan which has
promoted foreign intervention and occupation. There is no other country in the
modern era which has experienced attack and occupation by three major powers:
Britain, the Soviet Union and the US. The feudal, tribal, ultra-conservative,
sectarian and ethnic cleavages in Afghanistan along with its failure to
establish a central control over the countryside transformed the country into a
fragile, failing and failed state.
After 9/11
and the disbanding of the Taliban regime by the US-led attack, thousands of
Afghans who had left the country and settled in the West because of war,
returned in order to contribute to the rebuilding of their destroyed homeland.
Prosperous overseas Afghans thought that with the strong backing of the West
and other friendly countries they could transform Afghanistan into a stable and
thriving country. But soon they realised that they were wrong as due to failed
governance, rampant corruption and insecurity, it was not possible for them to
help change the destiny of Afghanistan.
Because of
three main reasons, Afghanistan in unlikely to be peaceful and stable in 2021.
First,
there is no indication on the part of the Taliban that they have renounced
violence against the Afghan security forces. On January 15, a Taliban attack
killed several Afghan soldiers. It is not possible for the Taliban to continue
their attacks and target Afghan security forces and for intra-Afghan talks to
also go on. Unless the Taliban amend their intransigent position, agree to
become part of the political process, form a political party and participate in
elections, one cannot expect peace in Afghanistan. If the Taliban leadership
blames hardline field commanders for violence because of their rejection of the
Afghan government, how can then intra-Afghan talks continue? The problem is
that the Taliban still demand that the government should be handed over to them
so that they can re-establish the “Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan”. Their
assertion to capture power by force will be counter-productive because of the
predictable resistance from their opponents.
Second, it
is yet to be seen whether the Biden-Kamala administration will own the Doha
Accord which lacked the involvement of the Afghan government. Will the US now
agree for a total withdrawal of its forces because both NATO and Pentagon have
expressed their reservations about the exit strategy as the vacuum created will
be dangerous and force Afghanistan into a fresh civil war?
Afghan
critics of the Doha agreement argue that it was like making a deal with Al
Qaeda. There is no indication that the Taliban have delinked themselves from
their former erstwhile ally Al Qaeda, and deep down the nexus between the two
will become obvious once foreign forces leave Afghanistan and the Kabul regime
faces a collapse. The nightmare of the Taliban again seizing power and imposing
their own brand of Shariah is not a myth but a reality because on numerous
occasions the Taliban have made it clear that if they gain power again they
will practise the same policies they were following from 1996-2001.
Third,
Pakistan’s predicament is of the devil and deep blue sea: if foreign forces
leave Afghanistan, the country will be plunged into a new phase of civil war
resulting in a fresh influx of refugees dismantling the barbed fence along the
Pak-Afghan border. And, if the foreign forces remain in Afghanistan, it would
mean sustained violence and terrorism, thus deepening chaos, disorder and
instability in Pakistan’s western neighbour.
Pakistan’s
past patronage of the Taliban and its ‘interventionist’ policy in Afghanistan
since the withdrawal of Soviet forces in February 1989 still haunts Islamabad
because it led to deep scars and resentment in Afghan society about the manner
in which Islamabad tried to impose its supported regime in Kabul.
The way out
of violence and instability in Afghanistan is to hold a referendum about
whether the Afghan Taliban join the political process and follow a democratic
path through elections. A referendum, if held in an impartial and peaceful
manner, will help decide the future role of the Taliban in Afghanistan.
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2280867/how-can-afghanistan-be-peaceful-in-2021
------
America — A Warning
By Farrukh Khan Pitafi
January 23,
2021
Joseph
Biden is now the 46th president of the United States. As he said in his
inaugural address, democracy has prevailed. The assault on democracy failed and
the Trump era has ended. But the next time you may not be as lucky. The
underlying disease that caused the threat to US integrity only grows every
single day. They have found a vaccine for Covid, but there is no vaccine for
this one — intolerance.
Hypothetically
speaking this is how this could have gone down even this time. During the
attack on the Capitol building, when all lawmakers were assembled there, a few
moles among the Capitol police and secret service could have handed over then
vice-president Pence, then vice-president-elect Harris, Congressional leaders
and many lawmakers to the mob. I do not want to disturb you with vivid imagery.
Suffice it to say those nooses, weapons and pipe bombs were not just there for
optics. Among the assailants there were men and women who had vowed to kill
somebody important in the session. A shock of this magnitude would have plunged
the US into a constitutional crisis, bringing a premature end to the transition
process. This would have given the then incumbent an opportunity to declare
emergency, impose martial law and postpone the transition or further elections
indefinitely. Or then would have taken him out too in an apparent counter
action.
What would
have followed is not easy to guess. Bringing Trump back to power is an excuse.
Whosoever was plotting this had another purpose in mind. To ignite a race war
in the US. If you have not been paying attention you need to recall the
right-wing media narrative about a probable civil war in case Trump lost the
election. Well, civil war is shorthand for a race war. Not convinced? Let us go
back to the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, in 2017. What slogans do
you hear? Jews will not replace us. And blood and soil. Or as Nazis used to put
it — Blut und Boden — the idea that race and settlement area ought to define
nationhood. What Nazi Germany did to its minorities is known to all. Already
widely prevalent among the Western far-right is this conspiracy theory called
the great replacement which claims that the white population of the West is
being systematically replaced by people of other colours and races. All this
talk of illegal immigrants, birthright citizenship, American carnage,
disempowerment of the working class is a cleverly constructed pyramid which
invariably culminates into the demand for racial purity and ethnic purges.
In the
likely scenario, judging by the mood at the time, one could say at least one
state (most likely Texas) would have announced secession. This would have led
to mass defections in the armed forces based either openly on race or then
thinly disguised as on the basis of state(s) of origin (Texas or the entire
South). A civil war would have ensued coupled with the mass expulsion of
minorities from the new territories. Nuclear weapons would have been seized and
used on old territories plunging America into dark ages. And that is not all.
This civil war would have spilled over into Europe and other countries like
Russia, Australia, China, Israel and Japan dragged into the mix by random
attacks. The entire world’s power structure would have crumbled giving birth to
a new Aryan world order. The source of extrapolation: the neo-Nazi Bible.
Fortunately,
this did not happen. The secret service and the Capitol police (basically your
average parliamentary guards) did their job. The attempts of the mob to slay
the executive and the Congressional leaders were frustrated. The armed forces
leadership then came up with that unusual letter calling all servicemen to obey
the Constitution. And the former vice-president and Congressional leadership
stood its ground. So many moving parts. Anything could have gone wrong. It did
not. But even then, it took a Washington DC lockdown and some 25,000 National
Guardsmen for the inauguration to be made possible. The threat of domestic
terrorism has not subsided and the FBI is still struggling to identify the
January 6 pipe bomber who was covered from head to toe and appears to be a
professional saboteur.
Here’s the
question of logistics. If you look at the underlying QAnon conspiracy theory
and groups like Proud Boys and Boogaloo Bois, you already see the trappings of
a massive psy-op organised on the pattern of a live action role playing game.
But when you look at the financial part of the equation, this whole thing
appears to be a logistical nightmare. Fortunately, thanks to some ace
investigative reporting by Yahoo News and equally laudable research by a
cryptocurrency expert software house Chainalysis, we know that only a month
before the Capitol attack a substantial (though not dramatically large) sum was
paid to several far-right elements by one now-deceased French blogger through
Bitcoins, the alt-right’s preferred form of currency. But the story takes many
strange twists. The said blogger was rich enough, and heartbroken enough by the
decline of the West or the white people to not only part with a sizeable sum
but to take his life and purely coincidentally just a month before the attack
on the US Capitol. What are the odds? If you ask me this looks like an
intelligence cover up. One man, probably someone hired to reroute foreign
funds, killed to cover tracks and then presented as a suicide.
But who
could be the financier then? Two very obvious suspects could be malcontents
within America’s own intelligence community and Russia. America’s own because
they would have the wherewithal. Russia because, as has been repeatedly pointed
out, it has the motive. If it were elements within the US security establishment
either they would have been exposed or become successful by now. Given that
Russia has been flagged so often, if it were involved the story would have been
much different today. It also knows any such civil war would spill into its
territories as well and its own history of fighting fascism cannot be ignored.
The same set of arguments can be used for China. Wherever fascism and racism
have not lost their appeal and such elements are in power could be the source.
This is only one money trail. There must be many others.
The Biden
administration has tapped Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall (an expert on nuclear
issues and Russia) as the White House Homeland Security Adviser and Russ
Travers (a terror expert) as her deputy. Travers was fired by the Trump administration
as the head of the National Counterterrorism Center when he tried to reposition
it to focus on domestic terrorism. Retaining Christopher Wray as the FBI
director may also come handy.
But here is
the problem. A lot of brain power seems to go into co-opting and weaponising
the outrage against the alleged micro-transgressions. The new administration
will need as much if not more brainpower to combat the threat and disarm it
with an effective counter narrative. Without it, one way or the other we are living
in a world that is a re-imagined reboot of The Turner Diaries. Also the US will
have to have a zero-tolerance policy for fascism around the world.
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2281007/america-a-warning
------
URL: https://newageislam.com/pakistan-press/pakistan-press-roots-extremism,-israeli/d/124129
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