Thursday, May 28, 2009
Saturday, May 9, 2009
'War crimes' committed in Sri Lanka
HRW says at least 30 attacks were carried out on hospitals since December 2008
A leading humanitarian group has accused the Sri Lankan military of repeatedly attacking hospitals in the northern Vanni region during fighting with rebels.In a statement on Friday, Human Rights Watch (HRW) said that the military commanders responsible for ordering the aerial and artillery attacks could be prosecuted for war crimes.
HRW said it had documented at least 30 artillery and air attacks on permanent and makeshift hospitals in the combat area since December 2008. One of the deadliest attacks took place May 2, HRW said, when artillery shells struck Mullaivaikal hospital in the government-declared "no-fire zone," killing 68 people and wounding 87.
'Breaking international law'"Hospitals are supposed to be sanctuaries from shelling, not targets," Brad Adams, Asia director of HRW, said.
Focus: Sri Lanka
Q&A: Sri Lanka's civil war
The history of the Tamil Tigers
Timeline: Conflict in Sri Lanka
'High cost' of victory over Tigers
Caught in the middle"While doctors and nurses struggle to save lives in overcrowded and underequipped facilities, Sri Lankan army attacks have hit one hospital after another."The group has criticised both the Sri Lankan armed forces and the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) for breaking international law during fighting in recent months and for putting civilian lives at risk. The Sri Lankan government has denied using heavy weapons in the war zone and says it is taking care not to harm civilians.Meenakshi Ganguly, a senior researcher with HRW in Mumbai, told Al Jazeera: "There is a 'safe zone' that has been declared by the government, there are hospitals in that 'safe zone' - and those are the hospitals that have been struck."Both sides are responsible for violating international humanitarian law and the laws of war because a hospital, if considered a place where it is a safe sanctuary, should not be used in any kind of combat ... they are repeatedly shelling hospitals in a safe zone," she said.The ongoing fighting between the military and the LTTE has sparked international concerns over the plight of civilians trapped in rebel-held territory.
Thousands of people have fled the area but the UN has said that up to 50,000 civilians could still be trapped.
Sri Lanka says troops are on the verge of defeating the LTTE, which has been battling government forces for more than two decades to carve out a separate homeland for the country's minority ethnic Tamils.
The LTTE has reportedly suffered huge losses in recent fighting and is now confined only to a small patch of land in the island-country's north
Friday, May 8, 2009
The pig is a much-reviled creature in the Holy Land. It especially provokes shudders of horror and disgust among ultra-orthodox Jews. In the new rightwing cabinet, the black-frocked Deputy Health Minister Yakov Litzman finds the name “Swine Flu” so revolting that he wants the epidemic re-named the “Mexican Flu”.Would it be a surprise if I were to tell you that Litzman is from the United Torah Judaism party?Ok, so pigs are very un-Kosher and unclean. But isn't this a bit unfair to the Mexicans? It was a pig's fault that the flu is now spreading around the world, not a Mexican's. So why should the Mexicans take the rap? After all, they're the flu's victims, not its cause.Israel had one scare about the Swine, sorry Mexican, flu. An Israeli tourst returning from Mexico came down with a fever and a bad cough –the symptoms for the flu—and they hospitalized him immediately. He was cleared. But with so many flights between the U.S. and Israel daily, Litzman isn't taking any chances. He says the Israeli government is upping its stocks of Tamiflu so that 25% of the population will be covered. That is if Tamiflu works against the epidemic.As for Litzman, you'd think that he would stick to “Swine” flu. It's one more reason to stay away from pigs
Slaughter first, then apologize8 May 2009
It is simply not good enough for US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to “deeply” regret the slaying this week of over 100 innocent Afghan civilians, including some 20 children, near Farah in western Afghanistan. Nor is it acceptable for American commanders to repeat the mantra that they do everything in their power to minimize euphemistically named “collateral damage” — i.e. killing ordinary people who have nothing to do with the Taleban.
These are just words. The shattered bodies of men, women and children speak so much more eloquently. When citizens of Farah protested angrily yesterday, they were yelling for the Americans to quit their country and showering stones at government buildings. Who can blame them? Whether their fury actually will now translate into support for the Taleban cannot be assumed. This is still a country with bitter memories of Taleban rule. But by calling on the US and by extension NATO forces to get out, it is clear that their willingness to cooperate with the foreigners to help check the insurgency has been sharply reduced, if not destroyed.
Unfortunately, this sort of terrible incident has happened so many times before. US forces by and large seem incapable of fighting high-tech wars in low-tech countries. It happened in Vietnam, then in Somalia and most recently in Iraq. It is happening again now in Afghanistan and along the Pakistan border, where highly sophisticated armed drones have inflicted high civilian casualties though Americans say they are targeting the Taleban and Al-Qaeda insurgents.
It is simply inadequate to claim the men they are aiming at hide themselves amidst innocent civilians. That is the argument the Israelis used to bludgeon defenseless Palestinians in Gaza to the horror of the rest of the world. The plain fact is that if there is ever a choice between not firing and letting a target escape or firing and killing other people as well as the enemy, that choice has always to be not to fire. Insurgents cannot hide all the time in civilian communities. They must at some point break away to launch their attacks. It is then and only then that the US should be engaging them. The technology is there in the form of satellites that can read auto number plates from far out in space and watching unmanned drones that can circle slowly for hours on end. Even if the insurgents try to disguise themselves, their weapons can be spotted by these flying cameras.
So if they have the means to target only the enemy, why is it that the Americans continue to make so many deadly errors? With so much advanced equipment, it can only be incompetence or deeply inadequate rules of engagement or worse an uncaring and undisciplined approach by those whose pushing of a button can cause death and maiming to scores of blameless people. If Washington really wants to check the Taleban and facilitate a negotiated peace, it has to stop killing and start caring about ordinary Afghans. Slaughtering them and then apologizing is contemptible.
Missing voices in torture debate
Excerpts from an editorial in New York Times on torture:
Last month’s release of memos prepared by the Bush Justice Department and the disclosure of a report by the International Committee of the Red Cross on the brutal treatment of detainees expanded public knowledge of an ignominious chapter in the nation’s history. But these and other related disclosures do not provide a complete record of the government’s abuse of detainees. One missing element is the words of those prisoners subjected to waterboarding and other brutality.
Those voices remain muffled by a combination of Bush-era resistance to a reasonable Freedom of Information Act request by the American Civil Liberties Union, and the gag order imposed on lawyers representing Guantanamo detainees. Attorney General Eric Holder needs to promptly repudiate both. For two years, the ACLU has been seeking complete transcripts of the hearings at Guantanamo for 14 men who were previously in CIA custody, including Abu Zubaydah, who has been described as an operative of Al-Qaeda and was waterboarded at least 83 times. But the publicly released version of these transcripts deleted all detainee statements about their ordeals.
The ACLU is appealing an ill-considered ruling by a federal trial judge in the District of Columbia, who refused to review the sought-after material before blindly upholding the bogus Bush administration claim that disclosure would damage national security.
Rather than simply adopt the Bush stand, the Justice Department has obtained a filing extension and is weighing what to do. Plainly, the right thing to do is to release the transcripts with the redacted portions filled in. The Bush team’s national security claim always had the odor of a cover-up. The interrogation program it was protecting has been discontinued, and crucial details are known. It is unsupportable to blank out grim details
It is simply not good enough for US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to “deeply” regret the slaying this week of over 100 innocent Afghan civilians, including some 20 children, near Farah in western Afghanistan. Nor is it acceptable for American commanders to repeat the mantra that they do everything in their power to minimize euphemistically named “collateral damage” — i.e. killing ordinary people who have nothing to do with the Taleban.
These are just words. The shattered bodies of men, women and children speak so much more eloquently. When citizens of Farah protested angrily yesterday, they were yelling for the Americans to quit their country and showering stones at government buildings. Who can blame them? Whether their fury actually will now translate into support for the Taleban cannot be assumed. This is still a country with bitter memories of Taleban rule. But by calling on the US and by extension NATO forces to get out, it is clear that their willingness to cooperate with the foreigners to help check the insurgency has been sharply reduced, if not destroyed.
Unfortunately, this sort of terrible incident has happened so many times before. US forces by and large seem incapable of fighting high-tech wars in low-tech countries. It happened in Vietnam, then in Somalia and most recently in Iraq. It is happening again now in Afghanistan and along the Pakistan border, where highly sophisticated armed drones have inflicted high civilian casualties though Americans say they are targeting the Taleban and Al-Qaeda insurgents.
It is simply inadequate to claim the men they are aiming at hide themselves amidst innocent civilians. That is the argument the Israelis used to bludgeon defenseless Palestinians in Gaza to the horror of the rest of the world. The plain fact is that if there is ever a choice between not firing and letting a target escape or firing and killing other people as well as the enemy, that choice has always to be not to fire. Insurgents cannot hide all the time in civilian communities. They must at some point break away to launch their attacks. It is then and only then that the US should be engaging them. The technology is there in the form of satellites that can read auto number plates from far out in space and watching unmanned drones that can circle slowly for hours on end. Even if the insurgents try to disguise themselves, their weapons can be spotted by these flying cameras.
So if they have the means to target only the enemy, why is it that the Americans continue to make so many deadly errors? With so much advanced equipment, it can only be incompetence or deeply inadequate rules of engagement or worse an uncaring and undisciplined approach by those whose pushing of a button can cause death and maiming to scores of blameless people. If Washington really wants to check the Taleban and facilitate a negotiated peace, it has to stop killing and start caring about ordinary Afghans. Slaughtering them and then apologizing is contemptible.
Missing voices in torture debate
Excerpts from an editorial in New York Times on torture:
Last month’s release of memos prepared by the Bush Justice Department and the disclosure of a report by the International Committee of the Red Cross on the brutal treatment of detainees expanded public knowledge of an ignominious chapter in the nation’s history. But these and other related disclosures do not provide a complete record of the government’s abuse of detainees. One missing element is the words of those prisoners subjected to waterboarding and other brutality.
Those voices remain muffled by a combination of Bush-era resistance to a reasonable Freedom of Information Act request by the American Civil Liberties Union, and the gag order imposed on lawyers representing Guantanamo detainees. Attorney General Eric Holder needs to promptly repudiate both. For two years, the ACLU has been seeking complete transcripts of the hearings at Guantanamo for 14 men who were previously in CIA custody, including Abu Zubaydah, who has been described as an operative of Al-Qaeda and was waterboarded at least 83 times. But the publicly released version of these transcripts deleted all detainee statements about their ordeals.
The ACLU is appealing an ill-considered ruling by a federal trial judge in the District of Columbia, who refused to review the sought-after material before blindly upholding the bogus Bush administration claim that disclosure would damage national security.
Rather than simply adopt the Bush stand, the Justice Department has obtained a filing extension and is weighing what to do. Plainly, the right thing to do is to release the transcripts with the redacted portions filled in. The Bush team’s national security claim always had the odor of a cover-up. The interrogation program it was protecting has been discontinued, and crucial details are known. It is unsupportable to blank out grim details
Patriotic, Integrationist EU Muslims
IOL Staff
"European Muslims want to be part of the wider community and contribute even more to society," Mogahed said. (Google)CAIRO — Muslims in Europe are more loyal to their countries, have a strong willingness to integrate and have strong confidence in democratic institutions, a new global poll has found.
"European Muslims want to be part of the wider community and contribute even more to society," said Dalia Mogahed, head of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies.
The "Gallup Coexist Index 2009: A Global Study of Interfaith Relations" poll found Muslims in key European countries identify themselves with their country of residence.
The survey, by Gallup and the Coexist Foundation, found that 52 percent of French Muslims identify themselves with their country, compared to 55 percent of the general public.
In Germany, 40 percent of Muslims identify themselves with the country against 32 percent of the wide public while 77 percent of British Muslims identify themselves with Britain against 75 percent of the public.
The poll said the findings run counter to the prevailing perception that European Muslims are more loyal to their countries of origin.
"Since 9/11 and the terrorist attacks in Madrid and London, mistrust toward European Muslims has become palpable," the poll authors wrote.
"Significant segments of European societies openly express doubt that Muslim fellow nationals are loyal citizens.
"The integration debate has to widen its frame, moving beyond the confines of security and religion, and focus more on the socioeconomic struggles of citizens of all faiths."
The survey, described as the first of its kind, polled at least 500 Muslims in June and July of last year.
At least 1,000 members of the general public in each country were also randomly surveyed to create comparisons on specific issues.
Integrationist
The survey also found that European Muslims have a strong willingness to integrate.
"This research shows that many of the assumptions about Muslims and integration are wide of the mark," said Mogahed, who was the first Muslim woman appointed to a position in US President Barack Obama's administration.
It showed that Muslims in France, Britain and Germany are more willing to integrate into society.
The poll found that 49 percent of French Muslims are tolerant and have a "live-and-let-live attitude toward people of other faiths, and they generally feel that they treat others of different faiths with respect".
It also showed that 22 percent of French Muslims are integrated, who actively seek to know more about and learn from others of different religious traditions.
In Germany, 49 percent of Muslims are tolerant while 13 percent are integrated.
In Britain, the poll found that 45 percent of Muslims are tolerant and 20 percent are integrated.
The poll found strong majorities of British, French, and German Muslims and the general populations in their respective countries believe mastering the national language, having a job, and getting a better education are critical components of integration.
But the survey showed that the pace of Muslim integration in the US and Canada is much faster than in Europe.
"This can be explained by the historical importance of immigration in the development of Canada and the United States as modern nations," said Mogahed.
She added that better access to higher education and work in North America had helped over decades to create more integration and social advancement.
The poll also found that Muslims have strong confidence in democratic institutions.
"Muslims are very likely - often more likely than the general public - to express confidence in democratic institutions and a desire to live in neighborhoods with mixed ethnic and religious backgrounds," it said.
In Germany, the trust placed by Muslims in the state's institutions "proves that strong religious beliefs don't translate into a lack of loyalty
IOL Staff
"European Muslims want to be part of the wider community and contribute even more to society," Mogahed said. (Google)CAIRO — Muslims in Europe are more loyal to their countries, have a strong willingness to integrate and have strong confidence in democratic institutions, a new global poll has found.
"European Muslims want to be part of the wider community and contribute even more to society," said Dalia Mogahed, head of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies.
The "Gallup Coexist Index 2009: A Global Study of Interfaith Relations" poll found Muslims in key European countries identify themselves with their country of residence.
The survey, by Gallup and the Coexist Foundation, found that 52 percent of French Muslims identify themselves with their country, compared to 55 percent of the general public.
In Germany, 40 percent of Muslims identify themselves with the country against 32 percent of the wide public while 77 percent of British Muslims identify themselves with Britain against 75 percent of the public.
The poll said the findings run counter to the prevailing perception that European Muslims are more loyal to their countries of origin.
"Since 9/11 and the terrorist attacks in Madrid and London, mistrust toward European Muslims has become palpable," the poll authors wrote.
"Significant segments of European societies openly express doubt that Muslim fellow nationals are loyal citizens.
"The integration debate has to widen its frame, moving beyond the confines of security and religion, and focus more on the socioeconomic struggles of citizens of all faiths."
The survey, described as the first of its kind, polled at least 500 Muslims in June and July of last year.
At least 1,000 members of the general public in each country were also randomly surveyed to create comparisons on specific issues.
Integrationist
The survey also found that European Muslims have a strong willingness to integrate.
"This research shows that many of the assumptions about Muslims and integration are wide of the mark," said Mogahed, who was the first Muslim woman appointed to a position in US President Barack Obama's administration.
It showed that Muslims in France, Britain and Germany are more willing to integrate into society.
The poll found that 49 percent of French Muslims are tolerant and have a "live-and-let-live attitude toward people of other faiths, and they generally feel that they treat others of different faiths with respect".
It also showed that 22 percent of French Muslims are integrated, who actively seek to know more about and learn from others of different religious traditions.
In Germany, 49 percent of Muslims are tolerant while 13 percent are integrated.
In Britain, the poll found that 45 percent of Muslims are tolerant and 20 percent are integrated.
The poll found strong majorities of British, French, and German Muslims and the general populations in their respective countries believe mastering the national language, having a job, and getting a better education are critical components of integration.
But the survey showed that the pace of Muslim integration in the US and Canada is much faster than in Europe.
"This can be explained by the historical importance of immigration in the development of Canada and the United States as modern nations," said Mogahed.
She added that better access to higher education and work in North America had helped over decades to create more integration and social advancement.
The poll also found that Muslims have strong confidence in democratic institutions.
"Muslims are very likely - often more likely than the general public - to express confidence in democratic institutions and a desire to live in neighborhoods with mixed ethnic and religious backgrounds," it said.
In Germany, the trust placed by Muslims in the state's institutions "proves that strong religious beliefs don't translate into a lack of loyalty
Handwritten letters claimed "torture" by US militarySaddam's "sleepless nights" revealed in FBI files
Saddam, seen here during his 2004 trial, alleged abuse and mistreatment from US officials in a series of handwritten letters released by the FBI
DUBAI (AlArabiya.net)
In his final days, ousted Iraqi president Saddam Hussein complained of torture and severe "beatings" as well sleep deprivation in a series of letters penned during his time in American captivity, press reports said on Tuesday. The handwritten letters, obtained by the New York Daily News, poured out complaints of mental and physical abuse by the "detention gang" of the United States military jailers. In one letter Hussein wrote: "not a single part of my body was spared of the severe harm inflicted by the detention gang," adding, "some of the traces are still visible on my body."Hussein described his detention center – believed to be inside Baghdad International Airport – as a nightmarish chamber where sleepless nights echoed the screams of prisoners being tortured."My opportunity to sleep in this place is limited and almost scarce," Saddam wrote. "I don't think there is anyone with a sensitive and humanitarian heart who can sleep amidst the screams of the tortured and the many blows of the doors and the squeaking sounds of the chairs."In one letter written on Christmas day 2003, the former Iraqi leader claimed that in the past three days, the "total hours of sleep did not exceed four to five hours."
Saddam Hussein was treated very humanely in prison, especially by George Piro who once brought him sweets
Ronald Kessler
American denial
The letter is authentic, but its writer lacked credibility, said Ronald Kessler, American journalist and author of The Terrorist Watch, which includes an extensive interview with George Piro, the FBI agent who interrogated Saddam Hussein after his capture."Saddam Hussein was treated very humanely in prison, especially by George Piro who once brought him sweets," he told Al Arabiya.Kessler said he has confirmed that the United States never tortured Saddam Hussein and added that such issues do not fall under the jurisdiction of the FBI."I guess what Saddam Hussein wrote about is what he used to do with his imprisoned opponents," Kessler concluded.Kessler was one of the most prominent journalists for the New York Times and is author of several best-selling books. The 17 books he wrote tackle key figures in the United States. He received 16 awards during his career. Kessler is currently a correspondent in New Max magazine, based in Washington.
Prisoner requests
The letters were among 352 pages in Hussein's declassified FBI file, which the paper requested after his December 2006 execution for crimes against humanity.The heavily redacted FBI file did not address Hussein's allegations of mistreatment and are not considered credible by U.S. experts.In one note, American officials - seemingly intent on convicting the imprisoned leader – stated that FBI should "overwhelm Hussein with the volume of evidence against him and others regarding human rights violations, mass murders and the use of chemical weapons."Following Saddam's capture on Dec. 15, 2003, he penned his first letter nine days later requesting the return of "a number of simple necessities, the most important are notebooks with chapters from a story." He also demanded an accounting of over $1 million in cash found hidden with him in a Tikrit spider hole.A 2004 memo also revealed that Hussein became fond of his FBI interrogator and even ended a hunger strike "for the benefit of Supervisory Special Agent Piro."The files show that the Hussein and his family were tracked by the agency since the early 1970s. One early memo described the Iraqi leader as someone who "enjoys a good Havana cigar
Arab, Muslim traders call China market town homeMuslim merchants see China as the “future”
Muslim and Arab traders find Chinese market home and see in the People's Republic their future
Yiwu, CHINA (Reuters)
Saied Elnagdi is at the heart of the growing trade links between China and Muslim nations, and the 26-year-old Egyptian loves it.Elnagdi runs a bustling cafe-restaurant in the center of Yiwu, a famed wholesale market town in the eastern province of Zhejiang, known for its hard-driving private enterprises.His clientele: the tens of thousands of Muslim traders who live here or pass through regularly to buy small consumer goods that eventually find their way into homes from Kabul to Cairo.
Here, I don't feel like I'm living in a foreign country.This is my second home
Saied Elnagdi
"Here, I don't feel like I'm living in a foreign country," Elnagdi said in his restaurant, the smell of scented tobacco permeating the air. "This is my second home."And Yiwu does feel like home for many Arabs and Muslims because the town has become a magnet for merchants from Afghanistan to South Africa.Traders plying the markets occasionally pause from bargaining over everything from doorknobs to wall hangings to pray in the hallways. On Fridays, thousands gather at the local mosque for prayers, often meeting up with friends afterwards for kebabs and conversation in the stalls set up out front.Touts outside the mosque even offer to illegally install satellite television channels to help the homesick keep up with news from back home."Everybody knows about this place," said Mahomed Paruk, a South African trader spending a couple of months in Yiwu during his first trip here. "I've always been meaning to come here."
What can I do in my country, with wars happening all the time. This place is much better for doing business. China to me means opportunity
Dana Hamad, an Iraqi Kurd
"China is the future"
Merchants like Paruk may come for the inexpensive goods, but they stay in part because life is affordable and comfortable.Far from restricting religious observance as it does in parts of China where separatism is rife, such as the northwestern region of Xinjiang, the government built the main mosque and assigns police officers to control traffic during Friday prayers.Dana Hamad, an Iraqi Kurd working in Yiwu as branch manager for an air cargo company, said he chose to live here rather than in the southern metropolis of Guangzhou because it is smaller, safer, and the people more friendly.To Hamad, moving here was a good chance for a fresh start after having his hopes of becoming a teacher dashed by war and finding few other suitable opportunities back home."What can I do in my country, with wars happening all the time? This place is much better for doing business. China to me means opportunity," he said.Life in Yiwu, however, is not always easy.Elnagdi, the restaurateur, said it took him some time to sort through all the red tape involved in setting up a business in China, and that stepped-up security during sensitive times such as last year's Beijing Olympics could be a hassle.Still, business is so good that he plans to open a second restaurant. He is even thinking of making longer-term plans to stay here."I hope I can find a Chinese wife, and then I'll stay on," he said. "People are very friendly here, and more importantly, China is the future
UN report does not specify if uranium traces are weapons gradeIAEA finds high-enriched uranium traces in Egypt
Traces turned up in swipe samples taken at the Inshas nuclear research site (File)
VIENNA (Reuters)
The United Nations nuclear watchdog is investigating the discovery of traces of highly enriched uranium at a nuclear research site in Egypt, according to a restricted International Atomic Energy Agency report obtained by Reuters.It did not specify whether the particles were weapons-grade, enriched to a level high enough for use as fuel for an atom bomb, as opposed to fuel for some nuclear reactors. An IAEA official reached by Reuters said this was being checked.The report, which described global IAEA work in 2008 to verify compliance with non-proliferation rules, said the highly enriched uranium (HEU) traces turned up in environmental swipe samples taken at the Inshas nuclear research site in 2007-08.
The HEU was discovered alongside particles of low-enriched uranium (LEU), the type used for nuclear power plant fuel.Egypt had explained to the IAEA that it believed the HEU "could have been brought into the country through contaminated radio-isotope transport containers", the May 5 report said.The U.N. watchdog's inspectors had not yet verified the source of the particles, it said, but there were no indications that Egypt's clarification was not correct.The IAEA is sensitive to possible nuclear proliferation in the Middle East because of inquiries into allegations of secret weapons-oriented nuclear activity in Iran and Syria, which both countries deny, and the 2003 exposure of a covert atomic bomb program in Libya, since scrapped.
Past problems
In Feb. 2005, an IAEA report chided Egypt for repeatedly failing to declare nuclear sites and materials but said inspectors had found no sign of an atom bomb program.At the time, IAEA diplomats said Egypt's breaches appeared minor compared to those of Iran and South Korea, both of which experimented with uranium enrichment and plutonium reprocessing -- technologies applicable to nuclear bomb-making.The new report said Egypt told the IAEA in 2004 that its atomic energy agency lacked the means to ensure "effective control" over all nuclear work in the country. A presidential decree was issued in 2006 to strengthen the agency's powers.Egyptian regulators then mounted a state-wide investigation and detected previously undocumented nuclear items, including depleted uranium, a by-product of enrichment used as a hardening agent in ordnance or as radiation-shielding material.The report said Egypt had turned over information about previously undeclared nuclear work and submitted design information about the Inshas facility, a hydrometallurgy pilot plant and a radio-isotope production site.Egypt's statements were judged consistent with IAEA findings and there were no more outstanding questions, it said.
Rising demand
In 2007 Egypt said it aimed to build several atomic reactors to meet rising energy demand and has since received nuclear cooperation offers from China, Russia, France and Kazakhstan.Many Arab states have similar ambitions, to offset high fossil-fuel costs and cut emissions to combat climate change.Industry analysts have suggested the United States could be willing to help Egypt develop a nuclear program if it pledged never to enrich uranium or reprocess spent nuclear fuel -- both proliferation-prone processes -- on its own soil.Egypt ratified the Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1981 but not the IAEA's 1997 Additional Protocol that gives inspectors the right to make intrusive, short-notice inspections of nuclear facilities and other sites not declared as nuclear
Traces turned up in swipe samples taken at the Inshas nuclear research site (File)
VIENNA (Reuters)
The United Nations nuclear watchdog is investigating the discovery of traces of highly enriched uranium at a nuclear research site in Egypt, according to a restricted International Atomic Energy Agency report obtained by Reuters.It did not specify whether the particles were weapons-grade, enriched to a level high enough for use as fuel for an atom bomb, as opposed to fuel for some nuclear reactors. An IAEA official reached by Reuters said this was being checked.The report, which described global IAEA work in 2008 to verify compliance with non-proliferation rules, said the highly enriched uranium (HEU) traces turned up in environmental swipe samples taken at the Inshas nuclear research site in 2007-08.
The HEU was discovered alongside particles of low-enriched uranium (LEU), the type used for nuclear power plant fuel.Egypt had explained to the IAEA that it believed the HEU "could have been brought into the country through contaminated radio-isotope transport containers", the May 5 report said.The U.N. watchdog's inspectors had not yet verified the source of the particles, it said, but there were no indications that Egypt's clarification was not correct.The IAEA is sensitive to possible nuclear proliferation in the Middle East because of inquiries into allegations of secret weapons-oriented nuclear activity in Iran and Syria, which both countries deny, and the 2003 exposure of a covert atomic bomb program in Libya, since scrapped.
Past problems
In Feb. 2005, an IAEA report chided Egypt for repeatedly failing to declare nuclear sites and materials but said inspectors had found no sign of an atom bomb program.At the time, IAEA diplomats said Egypt's breaches appeared minor compared to those of Iran and South Korea, both of which experimented with uranium enrichment and plutonium reprocessing -- technologies applicable to nuclear bomb-making.The new report said Egypt told the IAEA in 2004 that its atomic energy agency lacked the means to ensure "effective control" over all nuclear work in the country. A presidential decree was issued in 2006 to strengthen the agency's powers.Egyptian regulators then mounted a state-wide investigation and detected previously undocumented nuclear items, including depleted uranium, a by-product of enrichment used as a hardening agent in ordnance or as radiation-shielding material.The report said Egypt had turned over information about previously undeclared nuclear work and submitted design information about the Inshas facility, a hydrometallurgy pilot plant and a radio-isotope production site.Egypt's statements were judged consistent with IAEA findings and there were no more outstanding questions, it said.
Rising demand
In 2007 Egypt said it aimed to build several atomic reactors to meet rising energy demand and has since received nuclear cooperation offers from China, Russia, France and Kazakhstan.Many Arab states have similar ambitions, to offset high fossil-fuel costs and cut emissions to combat climate change.Industry analysts have suggested the United States could be willing to help Egypt develop a nuclear program if it pledged never to enrich uranium or reprocess spent nuclear fuel -- both proliferation-prone processes -- on its own soil.Egypt ratified the Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1981 but not the IAEA's 1997 Additional Protocol that gives inspectors the right to make intrusive, short-notice inspections of nuclear facilities and other sites not declared as nuclear
India's election in numbers
The five-phase election is one of numbers both big and small [GALLO/GETTY]India's general election, which begins on April 16, is the world's largest democratic exercise.
The electorate in what is also the world's largest democracy has increased by 41 million since 2004.
Of those eligible to vote in the 2009 election, 24 per cent are under 35 years of age, 48 per cent are women, and 82 per cent of them will be identified by photos on the electoral roll.
Special report
Lok Sabha, or the lower house of parliament, has 543 constituencies, and each elects one member.
While 131 seats are reserved for lower castes and tribes people as part of India's widespread affirmative action programme, the country's president can appoint two extra Anglo-Indian members.
Here are more facts and figures on the five-phase vote:
714,000,000 voters have registered.
6,100,000 security and civil personnel are on election duty.
828,804 polling booths will be operated nationwide.
1 - the number of voters required for a 100 per cent turnout at a polling station inside Gujarat state's Gir lion sanctuary, which caters to a lone constituent.
543 seats in the lower house of parliament are elected.
131 seats are reserved for tribals or lower-caste candidates.
5,180 metres - the elevation above sea level of India's highest polling booth in Fastan village in Jammu and Kashmir state's Ladakh region.
26 km - the distance from the Fastan polling booth to the nearest road. 1,368,430 electronic voting machines.
10,000 tonnes - the estimated amount of paper that will be saved by the use of electronic voting machines this year.
157 years - the combined age of two main candidates for prime minister, Manmohan Singh and LK Advani.
100,000,000,000 rupees ($2bn) - the total estimated cost of the 2009 election, according to a survey by the Centre for Media Studies (CMS).
2,500,000 rupees - the legal limit of campaign spending by individual candidates.
25,000,000,000 rupees - the combined amount candidates will spend on illegal vote buying, according to CMS estimates. 200,000 dollars have reportedly been paid by the ruling Congress party to secure campaign rights to the Oscar-winning song Jai Ho ("Victory") from the film Slumdog Millionaire.
2,000,000 bottles of indelible ink will be used to mark voters' fingers to prevent double voting
India elections: an overview
By Ranjit Bhaskar
Indians are going to the polls in the world's largest democratic exercise [EPA]While previous general elections in India have been fought over national issues, this time around coalition mathematics seems more important than campaigns over economic growth, terrorism or inflation.
With both the major national parties, the Congress and the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), being shunned by their regional allies across the country, the likelihood of a coalition of disparate parties coming to power after the April-May general elections looms large.
Not that India is new to coalitions. The Congress has ruled for most of the last five years through a stable coalition, the United Progressive Alliance (UPA). So did the BJP before that between 1999 and 2004 with its National Democratic Alliance (NDA).
The worry is that a coalition without a strong Congress or BJP to lead and hold it together will not last the full five-year term. It happened in 1996 when 13 parties came together to rule and fell two years, and two prime ministers, later.
Special report
It was not always like this. The Congress, which led India's freedom struggle, won the absolute majority of votes for decades after independence in 1947 - somewhat akin to the African National Congress's hold over politics in post-apartheid South Africa.
But a gradual erosion of support for the Congress, beginning in the mid-1970s, saw mainly national opposition parties, including the BJP, make steady gains and come to power in the 1990s.
And now in 2009, it may be the turn of regional parties who have already tasted power in the states, to come together and rule the country.
This motley group is called the Third Front and they have positioned themselves as the alternative to the UPA and NDA.
For their detractors, the Third Front is just an umbrella that could be folded away for parties that are not with the main coalitions.
Election mathematics
Politics in India, especially in the rural hinterland, is still substantially driven by identities of caste, sub-caste, and sub community within that.
The build-up to the election day is played out like a game of chess.
The BSP's Mayawati aims to be the first lower caste prime minister [GALLO/GETTY]Each major party watches whom the others are nominating in each constituency like hawks and then try to break the numbers: by getting relatives from the opposition candidate's family to stand, prodding some independent candidates to step up, buying off others who could swing key blocks.
With each move, the calculated aim is to splinter the electoral mathematics and nudge the needle to the barest minimum margin for victory.
And it is the mathematics that gives the Third Front confidence.
The Congress and the BJP won just over 50 per cent of the vote between them in the last election in 2004.
The Third Front reckons that any further fall in support for the two main parties would effectively give regional and caste-based parties the advantage. It is as if the smaller parties have smelt blood and are eager to zero in on the kill.
Parties which were aligned with the major parties are either unwilling to have a pre-poll arrangement or have bickered with these two parties over seat-sharing arrangements - a clear sign that they would rather pick their partners after the election results are out on May 16.
The Third Front
In depth
Voting takes place in the 543 constituencies in five phases from April 16 to May 13. Results will be announced on May 16.
Phase I16 April: Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Jammu and Kashmir, Kerala, Maharashtra, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Orissa, Uttar Pradesh, Chattisgarh, Jharkhand, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, LakshadwepTotal constituencies: 124
Phase II22 April: Manipur23 April: Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Goa, Jammu and Kashmir, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa, Tripura, Utter Pradesh, JharkhandTotal constituencies: 141 Phase III30 April: Bihar, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Jammu and Kashmir, Gujarat, Sikkim, Dadar and Nagar Haveli, Daman and DiuTotal constituencies: 107 Phase IV7 May: Bihar, Haryana, Jammu and Kashmir, Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, DelhiTotal constituencies: 85 Phase V13 May: Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Punjab, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Uttarakhand, Chandigarh, Pondicherry, Uttar PradeshTotal constituencies: 86The main players in the Third Front are the leftist parties, mainly the Communist Party Marxist, the Communist Party of India, the Revolutionary Socialist Party and the Forward Bloc.
The second-biggest partner is the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) led by Mayawati, the chief minister of India's largest state, Uttar Pradesh. Her support for the front is conditional: if they win she wants to be India's first prime minister from the so-called lower castes.
Other partners include the regional Telugu Desam Party, the Telangana Rashrtiya Samiti, the AIADMK and the Biju Janata Dal.
Together, this rump coalition, which cuts across ideology, had 96 seats in the last Lok Sabha or the lower house of parliament.
They could emerge as a decisive force if the main coalitions fall reasonably short of the simple majority of 272 seats in the 543-seat Lok Sabha.
With the BJP being an anathema to most of them, the Third Front is likely to end up supporting a Congress-led government.
And if the Congress tally drops drastically, they would pitch for leading a government, supported by the Congress.
In the 2004 elections, the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance's biggest support came from the leftist parties with 59 seats.
They supported the government from outside but withdrew support over the landmark civilian nuclear deal with the US in 2008.
So is India heading for a weaker, and perhaps short-lived, coalition government, with both major national parties struggling to keep up with the Third Front?
The main battle
The main national battle is still between the UPA and the NDA. Many opinion polls show that the ruling UPA could beat the main opposition NDA, but may still fall short of a majority in parliament.
Only weeks ago, the Congress seemed to have a better chance of winning, with its coalition appearing intact and better-than-expected performances in state elections last year. However, the party's dwindling base in former strongholds like Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra and Bihar states, is a major cause of worry for its leaders.
In many of these states, the party has been forced to play second fiddle to its allies, who are powerful there.
And seat-sharing arrangements for the Congress have broken down in Uttar Pradesh, accounting for 80 parliamentary seats, the biggest single source.
The birth of new regional parties has also threatened the party in swing states like Andhra Pradesh.
The UPA had the support of 263 MPs in the last parliament. Of this, 145 were Congress MPs.
The BJP had 138 seats, just seven seats short of the Congress.
However, its major allies in the NDA have either parted company or are seriously considering the option.
The chances of the NDA improving its tally hinges on the party improving its strength in states like Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, Jharkhand and Bihar.
Smaller allies like the Rashtriya Lok Dal (RLD) and Asom Gana Parishad (AGP), who have few seats between them, would hardly make a decisive difference even if their tally increased this time.
With Biju Janata Dal in Orissa having left it and no new alliances formed, the NDA appears to be in some trouble.
Conventional wisdom
All these calculations are conventional wisdom. But does the Indian voter really want the Third Front option?
A coalition of India's leftist parties may emerge as a decisive force [EPA]Investors and businesses worry that it could herald policy limbo just as the affects of the global economic recession are being felt in a still growing economy.
While reforms to open up the financial sector may be put aside amid the credit crunch, they are looking for changes in India's rigid labour laws as well as moves to privatise public sector companies to help boost investments. The fear is that a loose coalition will mean more squabbling over policy.
And the ordinary voter may still remember the political chaos unleashed by the Third Front during its short spell in power.
Many will be fervently hoping that the analysts get it wrong as in 2004.
In that election, the ruling BJP ran on the platform that declared India shining – the country had never had it so good.
While the rest of the world and the experts agreed, to the BJP's shock, India disagreed.
Also, a terror attack anytime before the end of polling may see the nation rallying behind either of the two main parties.
The truth is no one really knows what can happen. The Indian voter is shrewd and has always had a penchant for surprising the pundits
New battle for old Vietnam soldier
By Tom Fawthrop in Hanoi
Bauxite critics say the mining would ruin the rich eco-tourism potential of the highlands [EPA]
Fifty-five years after masterminding a military victory that led to the end of French colonial rule in Indochina, Vietnam's celebrated General Vo Nguyen Giap is still fighting.
The 98-year-old's latest battle - with words rather than bullets - is to save the environment and his "enemy" is bauxite mining.
The battle to save the environment may be Giap's toughest fight yet [Photo: T. Fawthrop]In its quest for rapid economic development, Vietnam's government has committed to mining an estimated 5.3 billion tonnes of bauxite, the main ore in aluminium, most of it located in the Central Highlands province of Dak Nong.
Giap, who orchestrated the historic defeat of the French army at Dien Bien Phu on May 7, 1954, has called on the Vietnamese government to halt those plans, citing environmental damage, harm to ethnic minorities, and a threat to national security as reasons.
The man who led North Vietnamese forces against the US in the Vietnam War has written two open letters - the latest just last month - against the government's bauxite plans, and his stand appears to have inspired others.
In a rare expression of public opposition in the one-party communist country, 135 intellectuals and scientists signed a petition that was delivered to the president of the national assembly in Hanoi.
"We shouldn't exploit the bauxite. The exploitation will cause serious consequences on the environment, society and national defence"
General Vo Nguyen Giap They called on the government to stop further development of new bauxite projects in the Central Highlands until a proper investigation of the environmental impact is completed.
Nguyen Tan Dung, the prime minister, has called bauxite mining "a major policy of the party and the state" and says the projects will go ahead while environmental issues are addressed.
But according to Professor Vo Quy, one of the country's foremost environmentalists, "damage to the environment far outweighs any economic benefits".
"I support economic development, but not bauxite mines," he told Al Jazeera, adding that the Central Highlands was an "area of stunning beauty with rich eco-tourism potential and a highly productive agricultural zone".
Fallout fears
Environmentalist fear bauxite red sludge would destroy fertile lands [EPA]Bauxite extraction produces thousands of tonnes of toxic waste known as "red sludge" according to Quy and other experts.
Vietnam's fledgling environmental movement fears the toxic residue could poison rivers that flow into heavily populated areas, including the vital Mekong Delta in the south - home to fish farms and some of Vietnam's most productive rice paddies.
In his letters, Giap called on scientists, managers and social activists to "suggest to the party and the state to have a sound policy on the bauxite projects in the Central Highlands".
"It is also my opinion that we shouldn't exploit the bauxite. The exploitation will cause serious consequences on the environment, society and national defence," he wrote.
The general also cited a 1980s report that warned the government that exploiting bauxite in the region "would cause devastating, long-term ecological damage, not only for local residents, but would also harm the lives and environment of people in the southern plains of the central provinces".
Contract signed
Despite pressure from the general, the government has gone ahead and signed a contract with a subsidiary of Chinese aluminium firm Chinalco to mine bauxite in the highlands.
But it did organise a two-day seminar in Hanoi last month for scientists to discuss how to minimise damage to the environment from bauxite mining.
And it said that the Chinese bauxite project would be reduced in scale, with restrictions placed on the numbers of Chinese workers.
Critics had complained that having thousands of Chinese mine workers in the strategic Central Highlands was an unacceptable security threat, given Vietnam's long history of conflict with its northern neighbour.
Nguyen Thien, a Vietnamese writer says the project "is all so illogical and irrational that many people suspect it is a part of a secret deal between Vietnam and China with strategic implications".
Still others say that bauxite mining is not even commercially viable since it requires a lot of water and electricity – commodities often in short supply in Vietnam.
Professor Dao Cong Tien, a former president of Ho Chi Minh City's Economics University, says the mining was likely to result in a water shortage which would severely affect Central Highlands agricultural producers.
Nguyen Huu Ninh, a Nobel Prize winner for his work on climate change, questions whether bauxite projects benefit the nation.
"There is no sense in a project that does not bring benefits to local people," he says.
But despite the doubts and objections, the government has said that the bauxite project will go ahead.
For Giap, the general who has triumphed in wars of resistance against French, and later US forces, the battle to protect the forests and rivers of the Central Highlands from the encroachments of Chinese economic may prove to be his toughest yet
Jordanians seek papal apology
By Nisreen El-Shamayleh in Amman, Jordan
Pope Benedict XVI and Jordan's King Abdullah II first met in September 2005 [EPA] As Jordan's Christians, who account for five per cent of the population, prepare to welcome Pope Benedict XVI to their country at the start of his first papal pilgrimage to the Middle East, the Muslim Brotherhood have renewed their criticism of the pontiff's visit.
In 2006, the pope quoted a medieval text that characterised some of the teachings of the Prophet Mohammed as "evil and inhuman," especially "his command to spread by the sword the faith."
Since then, Jordan's Brotherhood have been demanding the pope apologise for his remarks, which many Muslims interpreted as insulting to their faith.
The pontiff has said he was "deeply sorry" over the reaction to his speech, explaining that the passage he quoted did not reflect his own opinion.
However, Jamil Abu Bakr, a Brotherhood spokesman, says this is "insufficient" and falls short of a "clear public apology".
Abu Bakr told Al Jazeera that Muslims "love Jesus Christ more than Christians do" and said if the Vatican went "against the Christian faith when it acquitted Jews of spilling Christ's blood", then an apology to the world's Muslims is not too much to ask of the Holy See.
Visiting mosques
The pope is hoping to earn some plaudits when he visits the Al Hussein Bin Talal Mosque, the second such visit to a Muslim place of worship during his papacy. There, he will also discuss with Muslim leaders inter-faith dialogue and co-existence.
The pope's visit to the mosque and the meeting with Muslim leaders is interpreted by some Jordanians as an indirect apology that would not undermine his papal credibility.
The Muslim Brotherhood, however, have been excluded from the dialogue in what they suspect is a move by the Jordanian authorities - and not the Vatican - to avoid any controversy or confrontation between the pontiff and the country's largest opposition group.
Curbing the Muslim Brotherhood has typically been a strategy the Jordanian authorities have used in their of relations with the group.
Many in the Orthodox Christian community also believe the Vatican should apologise to Muslims in an effort to safeguard the peaceful inter-faith co-existence that has prevailed in Jordan.
Odeh Kawwas, an elected member of the Central Committee of the World Council of Churches and a former Christian MP, says apologies have been made by the Vatican to Jews over the Holocaust and, therefore, an apology extended to Muslims is necessary, particularly while the pope is on Jordanian soil.
Pilgrim of peace
The pope will not be visiting the Church of Madaba, a "treasured site" in JordanThe Pope will first visit the Regina Pacis centre for the handicapped and will then make a courtesy visit to the Jordanian royal family at the Al Husseini palace.
He will visit Mount Nebo where tradition holds that Moses saw the Promised Land from a distance. The pope will also bless the cornerstone of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem's Madaba University.
He will also celebrate a mass at the international stadium in Amman, where 30,000 people are expected to attend. He will visit Bethany Beyond the Jordan, site of Jesus' baptism and will bless the foundation stones of the Latin and Greek-Melkite churches.
But some Arab Christians in Jordan also have reservations about Pope Benedict's visit believing it to be a political move. Kawwas says not including the Church of Madaba, "one of Jordan's most treasured Christian and tourists sites, on the itinerary is unacceptable"; he believes it was left out because it is an Orthodox house of worship.
Like many who question the Papal pilgrimage across the Middle East, Kawwas also criticised the pope's eagerness to visit Israel on May 11 but not the Gaza Strip. The pontiff will, however, visit the occupied West Bank on May 12.
The pope says he is visiting the Holy Land as a pilgrim of peace in a region plagued by violence, injustice, mistrust and fear.
The Vatican described the papal pilgrimage as the "most awaited and perhaps most challenging trip so far" of Benedict's papacy because of the uncertain political situation in the area and the fragile prospects for peaceful conflict resolution.
"Most challenging trip"
Odeh Kawwas says many Christians in Jordan also want the Pope to apologise [EPA]
Pope Benedict's pilgrimage will be the third papal visit to the region after Pope Paul VI's in 1964 and Pope John Paul II's in 2000.
An estimated 10,000 delegates are expected to come to Jordan, the first leg of the pope's pilgrimage to the Middle East; the visitors will range from ordinary Christian worshippers to senior clergymen.
Jordanian tourism authorities are trying to ensure a smooth stay for the thousands of visitors expected to flock from Arab and foreign countries, explaining that they believe the papal visit will boost tourism in the country this year.
Jordan makes an annual $3 bn from tourism and the sector comprises 14.4 per cent of the country's GDP.
But because of the global economic downturn, the country has lost its main markets in the US and Europe as tourists opt to stay at home.
Tourism authorities are counting on media coverage - more than 1,270 journalists are covering the pontiff's visit - to promote Jordan's religious sites and help attract more tourists.
The Jordanian government says it is taking the visit very seriously to reach its economic objectives this year and to present itself as a model for inter-faith co-existence and peace in the region
Everyone should vote: Kalam
BANGALORE: Former president APJ Abdul Kalam who on Thursday cast his vote in New Delhi and rushed to Bangalore to inaugurate Wipro’s new R&D facility, said that voting is a must in a democracy. The former president arrived at the function an hour late. As I had to vote I could not make it on time, he said.“Voting is a must in a democracy. Instead of complaining about the country’s ills, we should participate in the democratic process” said Kalam. Citing an e-mail query sent to him by a first-time voter, Kalam said the voter was concerned about a lack of choices. He told him that there are a lot of educated persons contesting and our duty is to make the best choice
BANGALORE: Former president APJ Abdul Kalam who on Thursday cast his vote in New Delhi and rushed to Bangalore to inaugurate Wipro’s new R&D facility, said that voting is a must in a democracy. The former president arrived at the function an hour late. As I had to vote I could not make it on time, he said.“Voting is a must in a democracy. Instead of complaining about the country’s ills, we should participate in the democratic process” said Kalam. Citing an e-mail query sent to him by a first-time voter, Kalam said the voter was concerned about a lack of choices. He told him that there are a lot of educated persons contesting and our duty is to make the best choice
Poverty fuelling Muslim tension with West: Study
8 May 2009, 0122 hrs IST, AP
LONDON: Joblessness and poverty are a more potent source of tension between Muslims and wider European and US society than religious differences, one of the first major studies of Muslim integration since the Sept. 11 terror attacks claimed on Thursday. Attacks by Islamic extremists on the United States and European capitals such as Madrid and London have sparked debate on whether a failure of Muslims to integrate into Western society has fueled extremism. But a study of around 30,000 people in 27 countries by the Gallup polling company claims non-Muslims including the public and lawmakers have misunderstood the attitudes of most Muslims in the West, stifling attempts to promote understanding. These Muslims are more patriotic, more tolerant and more likely to reject violence than the rest of Western society believes they are, the study claims. It suggests most European Muslims, for example, are as happy as other Europeans to live alongside people of other faiths and ethnic backgrounds, and share broadly similar views with their neighbors. The findings appear to contradict the impression created by angry protests across Europe following the 2005 publication in Denmark of 12 cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, and recent rallies in which small groups of British Muslims have disrupted homecoming parades for soldiers returning from Iraq. But Dalia Mogahed, executive director of the London and New York-based Gallup Center for Muslim Studies and a faith adviser to US President Barack Obama, said the survey shows most Muslims welcome closer ties to the rest of society. The study focused chiefly on European Muslims, and the mistaken perceptions about their attitudes in wider European society. ``Many of the assumptions about Muslims and integration couldn't be more wide of the mark,'' she said. ``European Muslims want to be part of the wider community and contribute to society.'' The study did not produce detailed data on attitudes of American Muslims on this subject. But Mogahed said that in the United States Muslims enjoy relatively good relations with the rest of society, and suffer less from economic inequality. Despite their desire to belong, only a small number of Muslims questioned in Britain, for example 10 per cent consider themselves integrated into British society. That compares to 46 per cent of Muslims in France and 35 per cent in Germany. The global economic crisis could exacerbate such issues, with competition for jobs and resources adding stress to race relations, the study claimed. Researchers found 38 percent of British Muslims said they had a job, much lower than the figure for the British general public 62 per cent and lower than Muslims in Germany or France, where 53 per cent and 45 per cent respectively said they were employed. No figures were compiled for the United States. ``Economic integration may become more precarious in light of the current financial crisis affecting Europe,'' Mogahed said.
Muslims questioned by Gallup were pessimistic about their prospects. It found 71 per cent of Britain's Muslims considered themselves to be struggling to get by, as did 56 per cent of Muslims questioned in the United States. Research for the study was conducted in mid-2008, before the full impact of the current financial crisis hit. ``It's not about faith, it's not about ethnicity. The key thing that divides people is poverty and depravation,'' said Mohammed Shafiq, of the British Muslim organization the Ramadhan Foundation. British government research into radicalization also has highlighted joblessness and low pay as among factors that can push people toward extremism. Those with poor prospects can look to violent extremism to improve their sense of achievement and status, according to the research by security officials. Another key finding of the study was that Muslims don't prioritize their faith over patriotism, Mogahed said. Attempts to create a greater sense of national identity among Muslims have been a key concern for European lawmakers, particularly in Britain - where British-born Muslims have been behind several attempted terror attacks since 2001. Four suicide bombers who killed 52 commuters and themselves in an attack on London's subway and bus network on July 7, 2005 were Muslims born or raised in Britain - three with family ties to Pakistan. The study found that 77 per cent of British Muslims feel a strong sense of British identity, compared to 50 per cent of the country's non-Muslims. In France, around half of Muslims and non-Muslims say they feel a strong sense of patriotism. Muslims account for around 3 per cent, or 2 million people out of Britain's 60 million population. In France, Muslims represent almost 8 per cent - or 5 million people of the population of 65 million. In Germany they make up 4 per cent - or 3.3 million Muslims out of 82 million inhabitants. Estimates of the US Muslim population vary dramatically from 2 million to 6 million - and beyond. Gallup conducted multiple surveys in 27 countries in 2008. Polls of the general public typically questioned around 1,000 people, with a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. The company said the polls of Muslims involved samples of 500 people, with a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percentage points. Researchers interviewed Muslims and non-Muslims in Norway, France, Britain, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Canada, Israel, the US, Italy, India, South Africa, Burkina Faso, Brazil, Ethiopia, Mali, Chad, Malaysia, Tanzania, Niger, Mauritania, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Djibouti and Bangladesh
8 May 2009, 0122 hrs IST, AP
LONDON: Joblessness and poverty are a more potent source of tension between Muslims and wider European and US society than religious differences, one of the first major studies of Muslim integration since the Sept. 11 terror attacks claimed on Thursday. Attacks by Islamic extremists on the United States and European capitals such as Madrid and London have sparked debate on whether a failure of Muslims to integrate into Western society has fueled extremism. But a study of around 30,000 people in 27 countries by the Gallup polling company claims non-Muslims including the public and lawmakers have misunderstood the attitudes of most Muslims in the West, stifling attempts to promote understanding. These Muslims are more patriotic, more tolerant and more likely to reject violence than the rest of Western society believes they are, the study claims. It suggests most European Muslims, for example, are as happy as other Europeans to live alongside people of other faiths and ethnic backgrounds, and share broadly similar views with their neighbors. The findings appear to contradict the impression created by angry protests across Europe following the 2005 publication in Denmark of 12 cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, and recent rallies in which small groups of British Muslims have disrupted homecoming parades for soldiers returning from Iraq. But Dalia Mogahed, executive director of the London and New York-based Gallup Center for Muslim Studies and a faith adviser to US President Barack Obama, said the survey shows most Muslims welcome closer ties to the rest of society. The study focused chiefly on European Muslims, and the mistaken perceptions about their attitudes in wider European society. ``Many of the assumptions about Muslims and integration couldn't be more wide of the mark,'' she said. ``European Muslims want to be part of the wider community and contribute to society.'' The study did not produce detailed data on attitudes of American Muslims on this subject. But Mogahed said that in the United States Muslims enjoy relatively good relations with the rest of society, and suffer less from economic inequality. Despite their desire to belong, only a small number of Muslims questioned in Britain, for example 10 per cent consider themselves integrated into British society. That compares to 46 per cent of Muslims in France and 35 per cent in Germany. The global economic crisis could exacerbate such issues, with competition for jobs and resources adding stress to race relations, the study claimed. Researchers found 38 percent of British Muslims said they had a job, much lower than the figure for the British general public 62 per cent and lower than Muslims in Germany or France, where 53 per cent and 45 per cent respectively said they were employed. No figures were compiled for the United States. ``Economic integration may become more precarious in light of the current financial crisis affecting Europe,'' Mogahed said.
Muslims questioned by Gallup were pessimistic about their prospects. It found 71 per cent of Britain's Muslims considered themselves to be struggling to get by, as did 56 per cent of Muslims questioned in the United States. Research for the study was conducted in mid-2008, before the full impact of the current financial crisis hit. ``It's not about faith, it's not about ethnicity. The key thing that divides people is poverty and depravation,'' said Mohammed Shafiq, of the British Muslim organization the Ramadhan Foundation. British government research into radicalization also has highlighted joblessness and low pay as among factors that can push people toward extremism. Those with poor prospects can look to violent extremism to improve their sense of achievement and status, according to the research by security officials. Another key finding of the study was that Muslims don't prioritize their faith over patriotism, Mogahed said. Attempts to create a greater sense of national identity among Muslims have been a key concern for European lawmakers, particularly in Britain - where British-born Muslims have been behind several attempted terror attacks since 2001. Four suicide bombers who killed 52 commuters and themselves in an attack on London's subway and bus network on July 7, 2005 were Muslims born or raised in Britain - three with family ties to Pakistan. The study found that 77 per cent of British Muslims feel a strong sense of British identity, compared to 50 per cent of the country's non-Muslims. In France, around half of Muslims and non-Muslims say they feel a strong sense of patriotism. Muslims account for around 3 per cent, or 2 million people out of Britain's 60 million population. In France, Muslims represent almost 8 per cent - or 5 million people of the population of 65 million. In Germany they make up 4 per cent - or 3.3 million Muslims out of 82 million inhabitants. Estimates of the US Muslim population vary dramatically from 2 million to 6 million - and beyond. Gallup conducted multiple surveys in 27 countries in 2008. Polls of the general public typically questioned around 1,000 people, with a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. The company said the polls of Muslims involved samples of 500 people, with a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percentage points. Researchers interviewed Muslims and non-Muslims in Norway, France, Britain, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Canada, Israel, the US, Italy, India, South Africa, Burkina Faso, Brazil, Ethiopia, Mali, Chad, Malaysia, Tanzania, Niger, Mauritania, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Djibouti and Bangladesh
Gujarat HC designates nine judges for trial in 2002 Gujarat riot cases
8 May 2009, 1314 hrs IST, PTI
AHMEDABAD: The Gujarat High Court has designated nine judges for as many special courts to carry out the trial in the 2002 post-Godhra riot cases being probed by the Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT), high court officials said on Friday. The high court, in an order issued in this regard as per the SC judgement delivered early this month, has designated nine special courts, one for each case, which will become operational soon, they said. Out of the nine special courts four will be in Ahmedabad, two each in Mehsana and Anand, and one in Himmatnagar of Sabarkantha district. According to the court's order, additional sessions judge P R Patel has been designated to conduct the trial in the Godhra train carnage case which will be held in the premises of the Sabarmati Central Jail here. Judge S H Vora and additional sessions Judge Jyotsna Yagnik will be presiding over the trial of Naroda Gam and Naroda Patiya cases respectively. For the Gulburg society case, where Congress ex-MP Ehsan Jaffery was killed during the riots, Judge B U Joshi has been designated as judge for the special court. For the two cases in Mehsana district -- Dipda Darwaja and Sardarpura -- the court has designated Judge B N Kariya and Judge S C Srivastava respectively. Judges S Y Trivedi and R M Sarine have been designated to conduct trial in two riot cases in Khambodaj and Ode of Anand district respectively. For the riot case in Prantij taluka of Sabarkantha district where some British nationals were also killed, Judge H P Patel has been designated as judge of the special court which will be based in district headquarters Himmatnagar. The Supreme Court on May 1 lifted stay on trial of nine cases including Godhra train carnage and post-Godhra riot cases and ordered day-to-day hearing by fast track courts in Gujarat. It also took into consideration the report filed by Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by former CBI director R K Raghavan which probed the cases. While vacating its stay order of November 21, 2003, the court had directed that witnesses be provided security for their safe passage and if necessary at their place of living during the trial. The court said that the SIT will act as a nodal agency to decide as to which witnesses in the case should be given protection and relocated. It also armed SIT with sweeping powers and said that it would be open to the SIT chairman to seek change of public prosecutors if any deficiency was found during trial. The apex court also gave liberty to the SIT to recommend cancellation of bail if it is considered necessary
8 May 2009, 1314 hrs IST, PTI
AHMEDABAD: The Gujarat High Court has designated nine judges for as many special courts to carry out the trial in the 2002 post-Godhra riot cases being probed by the Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT), high court officials said on Friday. The high court, in an order issued in this regard as per the SC judgement delivered early this month, has designated nine special courts, one for each case, which will become operational soon, they said. Out of the nine special courts four will be in Ahmedabad, two each in Mehsana and Anand, and one in Himmatnagar of Sabarkantha district. According to the court's order, additional sessions judge P R Patel has been designated to conduct the trial in the Godhra train carnage case which will be held in the premises of the Sabarmati Central Jail here. Judge S H Vora and additional sessions Judge Jyotsna Yagnik will be presiding over the trial of Naroda Gam and Naroda Patiya cases respectively. For the Gulburg society case, where Congress ex-MP Ehsan Jaffery was killed during the riots, Judge B U Joshi has been designated as judge for the special court. For the two cases in Mehsana district -- Dipda Darwaja and Sardarpura -- the court has designated Judge B N Kariya and Judge S C Srivastava respectively. Judges S Y Trivedi and R M Sarine have been designated to conduct trial in two riot cases in Khambodaj and Ode of Anand district respectively. For the riot case in Prantij taluka of Sabarkantha district where some British nationals were also killed, Judge H P Patel has been designated as judge of the special court which will be based in district headquarters Himmatnagar. The Supreme Court on May 1 lifted stay on trial of nine cases including Godhra train carnage and post-Godhra riot cases and ordered day-to-day hearing by fast track courts in Gujarat. It also took into consideration the report filed by Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by former CBI director R K Raghavan which probed the cases. While vacating its stay order of November 21, 2003, the court had directed that witnesses be provided security for their safe passage and if necessary at their place of living during the trial. The court said that the SIT will act as a nodal agency to decide as to which witnesses in the case should be given protection and relocated. It also armed SIT with sweeping powers and said that it would be open to the SIT chairman to seek change of public prosecutors if any deficiency was found during trial. The apex court also gave liberty to the SIT to recommend cancellation of bail if it is considered necessary
30% chance of coup in Pakistan, according to analysts
8 May 2009, 1031 hrs IST, IANS
WASHINGTON: A top private risk analysis firm gave embattled Pakistan a three-in-ten chance of a military coup even before the latest offensive by Taliban rebels, according to a noted US analyst. New York-based Eurasiagroup, whose head of research is top former State Department, White House National Security Council and CIA official David F Gordon, said in a little noticed, late April report that it was more than possible the Pakistani Army would step in to stabilise the rebel-threatened country. The premise of Eurasiagroup's "scenario" is that "the global economic crisis proves too much to handle for the political leadership in Pakistan", writes Jeff Stein, National Security Editor of Congressional Quarterly in his "SpyTalk" column. The report was evidently written before Islamic Taliban rebels overran the Swat Valley this month, forcing the army into barricaded camps and threatening the viability of the government of President Asif Ali Zardari, he noted adding, "Presumably, the risk of a military coup is far greater now." Before that, the Eurasia report gave the nation a "30 percent" chance of losing its elected government to an army general like Pervez Musharaf, who seized power in 1999, and his predecessor, Gen. Zia Ul-Haq, who led the country from 1977 until his fatal plane crash in 1988. "As in the 1990s, the military concludes that it must intervene in politics for the sake of the nation-to stop the spread of militancy, revitalize the economy, and clean up civilian politics," the report envisioned. "New Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Kiyani had sought to distance the military from politics, but the political crisis between the PPP (Pakistan People's Party) and the PML-N (Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz) boosts the military's political clout and its willingness to intervene." "Kiyani does not pursue a full-fledged military coup, but rather the 'Bangladesh model.' The military removes President Asif Ali Zardari and his administration and establishes a caretaker government, which it tasks with the job of stabilizing the political and economic situation," the report suggested. "The military appoints Western-educated technocrats with no independent power base or political connections to serve in the new government. These officials maintain close contacts with Kiyani, who makes all strategic decisions," it said painting the coup scenario
8 May 2009, 1031 hrs IST, IANS
WASHINGTON: A top private risk analysis firm gave embattled Pakistan a three-in-ten chance of a military coup even before the latest offensive by Taliban rebels, according to a noted US analyst. New York-based Eurasiagroup, whose head of research is top former State Department, White House National Security Council and CIA official David F Gordon, said in a little noticed, late April report that it was more than possible the Pakistani Army would step in to stabilise the rebel-threatened country. The premise of Eurasiagroup's "scenario" is that "the global economic crisis proves too much to handle for the political leadership in Pakistan", writes Jeff Stein, National Security Editor of Congressional Quarterly in his "SpyTalk" column. The report was evidently written before Islamic Taliban rebels overran the Swat Valley this month, forcing the army into barricaded camps and threatening the viability of the government of President Asif Ali Zardari, he noted adding, "Presumably, the risk of a military coup is far greater now." Before that, the Eurasia report gave the nation a "30 percent" chance of losing its elected government to an army general like Pervez Musharaf, who seized power in 1999, and his predecessor, Gen. Zia Ul-Haq, who led the country from 1977 until his fatal plane crash in 1988. "As in the 1990s, the military concludes that it must intervene in politics for the sake of the nation-to stop the spread of militancy, revitalize the economy, and clean up civilian politics," the report envisioned. "New Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Kiyani had sought to distance the military from politics, but the political crisis between the PPP (Pakistan People's Party) and the PML-N (Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz) boosts the military's political clout and its willingness to intervene." "Kiyani does not pursue a full-fledged military coup, but rather the 'Bangladesh model.' The military removes President Asif Ali Zardari and his administration and establishes a caretaker government, which it tasks with the job of stabilizing the political and economic situation," the report suggested. "The military appoints Western-educated technocrats with no independent power base or political connections to serve in the new government. These officials maintain close contacts with Kiyani, who makes all strategic decisions," it said painting the coup scenario
Obama needs to learn from Karzai
M.K. Bhadrakumar
On the Afghan political theatre, without the opprobrium of western company, Hamid Karzai’s profile got a facelift.
In retrospect, U.S. President Barack Obama did a favour to Afghan President Hamid Karzai by excluding him from his charmed circle of movers and shakers who would wield clout with the new administration in Washington. Mr. Obama did not even converse with Mr. Karzai telephonically since he was sworn in U.S. President, though Afghanistan was the number one foreign policy priority of his presidency.
On the other hand, he deputed Vice-President Joseph Biden to Kabul to let it be known to Mr. Karzai that unless he governed better, the U.S. would rather seek a regime change. The Secretary-General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, Jaap de Hoop Schaffer, publicly chastised Mr. Karzai as if the Afghan leader was a mere vassal of the western alliance. It was an appalling breach of protocol as Mr. Schaffer, a one-time foreign minister himself, would know.
But Mr. Karzai has had the last laugh as he travelled to Washington from Kabul for an “intense” trilateral summit meeting with Mr. Obama and Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari on Thursday. Mr. Schaffer, Mr. Biden, and Mr. Obama — indeed, they all have something to ponder over this week. Clearly, Mr. Karzai is far from walking into the sunset. He seems poised to win the Afghan presidential election on August 20.
The supreme irony is that what probably helped Mr. Karzai more than anything else to successfully wrap up his re-election bid is that western politicians rubbished him and distanced themselves ostentatiously from him. On the Afghan political theatre, without the opprobrium of western company, Mr. Karzai’s profile got a facelift. He began gaining in credibility.
On Monday, Mr. Karzai formally registered his candidacy for the presidential election. The last date of filing nominations ends by the weekend. No gladiator has appeared to challenge him. His vice-presidential running mates will be two stalwarts of the erstwhile anti-Taliban Northern Alliance, Muhammad Fahim Qasim from Panjshir and Muhammad Karim Khalili from Hazarajat. It is no doubt a dream-ticket. Mr. Fahim brings in Tajik support in good measure, while Mr. Khalili is the unquestioned leader of the Hazara Shi’ites in Bamyan. Mr. Karzai himself, of course, is the proud scion of a powerful Pashtun tribe. Conceivably, the Karzai-Fahim-Khalili ticket may enjoy a back-to-back understanding with Uzbek strongman Abdul Rashid Dostum and Hazara commander Mohammad Mohaqiq from the Amu Darya region in northern Afghanistan.
Mr. Karzai’s ticket has several engrossing features. It is of course multi-ethnic, multicultural and inter-regional. Second, it has the potential to rally the Mujahideen. Both Mr. Fahim and Mr. Khalili were notable Mujahideen leaders. They have extensive networking with the Mujahideen leaders — including with ideologically disparate figures like Rasul Sayyaf or Gulbuddin Hekmatyar — who still form a significant constituency.
Third, their role in the anti- Taliban resistance is too well-known to be reiterated. Their presence in the top echelons of the power structure will underscore the imperative of an inclusive, broad-based government as part of any settlement with the Taliban. Fourth, Mr. Fahim and Mr. Khalili are truly “sons of the soil”. They may lack Karzai’s sartorial skill, English fluency, urbaneness and panache for diplomacy, but they stuck it out through the 30-year civil war. Also, they bring in something that Mr. Karzai himself lacks. They are both experienced commanders with sizeable followings and can significantly contribute to the “Afghanisation” of the war. Mr. Fahim also headed the intelligence wing of the Northern Shura under Ahmed Shah Massoud.
Besides, Mr. Karzai has in Mr. Fahim a running mate who is known to the Russians and in Mr. Khalili an “Ustad” who enjoyed the respect and backing of the Iranians. With Mr. Fahim and Mr. Khalili coming on board, Mr. Karzai has virtually ensured that there cannot be any unified opposition arrayed against his candidacy.
Mr. Karzai’s success offers some salutary lessons about Afghan politics. In essence, he spent the past few weeks in backroom negotiations — Afghan style — cutting deals with onetime adversaries, manoeuvring through minefields, reconciling contradictions, and compromising or bartering influence and power with political bosses. The high point was reached on Saturday when Gul Agha Sherzai, the popular governor of Nangarhar, who was expected to announce his candidacy this week, dropped by to meet Mr. Karzai in the presidential palace in Kabul.
The two Pashtun leaders were closeted for over four hours after which Mr. Sherzai emerged with a gem of a statement. He said: “I visited the president, and hugged his little son and decided to withdraw my candidacy. I will neither lead this [opposition] alliance nor announce my candidacy for the presidential election.”
Mr. Sherzai wouldn’t say more about his sudden change of heart. Instead, in a flamboyant show of indifference to all power, Mr. Sherzai said he would also resign as governor. Whereupon, the presidential spokesman in Kabul came up with a response that “The president of Afghanistan appreciated Gul Agha Sherzai’s announcement he will not run in the presidential election, and called it a positive step towards improving the government and unity of the people of Afghanistan”.
He added, “Hamid Karzai sees Gul Agha Sherzai as a very fine and hardworking governor and a good adviser, and rejects his resignation.” The political tremor ensuing from Mr. Sherzai’s change of heart will force a rethink on the other potential contenders in the election on August 20, who include Zalmay Khalilzad, former U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan who is popularly seen by Afghans as the “American candidate”, Ashraf Ghani, yet another U.S.-based contender who was also a former finance minister, Ali Jalali, former interior minister and Abdullah Abdullah, former foreign minister who used to be Massoud’s aide.
It doesn’t take much ingenuity to comprehend that with Mr. Sherzai’s reconciliation, Mr. Karzai has brought into his candidacy an axis of two powerful Pashtun tribes from the Kandahar and Nangarhar regions, the heartland of Pashtun nationalism.
The Afghan experience with democracy offers a good lesson for Mr. Obama: it is best to leave the Afghans to broker power-sharing on their own terms according to their own ethos and traditions. Be a facilitator if you wish, but never a dictator. Conceivably, unlike in 2001 when Mr. Karzai appeared as the U.S.’s choice, or in 2004 when the U.S. choreographed his election, this time around, if he indeed manages to win a mandate through his own efforts, he will enjoy a degree of legitimacy that Mr. Obama could never hope to confer on him. Arguably, Mr. Karzai is set to graduate to the league of Iraq’s Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
True, as Mr. Biden took leave of Kabul, he left behind a widespread impression in the Afghan bazaar that divested of Washington’s political support, Mr. Karzai’s days were numbered. Mr. Karzai has since made an extraordinary recovery in his standing. If a marker is to be put on the reversal of Mr. Karzai’s political fortunes, it could be dated January 20 when Mr. Obama ignored Mr. Karzai and instead invited four other Afghan politicians to attend his inaugural in Washington.
Curiously, those four Afghans included Mr. Sherzai and Mr. Abdullah who since figured as presidential hopefuls until last Saturday when Mr. Sherzai — the formerly drug-tainted warlord who resembles a rotund, feudal king and impressed with Mr. Obama, who once enjoyed a close relationship with Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence — travelled to Kabul, hugged Mr. Karzai’s two-year old son and decided it was simply not worth his while to contest an election against the little boy’s father.
Peering through the looking glass, what lies ahead? In the event of Mr. Karzai winning a fresh term as President, which is almost certain by now, all sorts of possibilities open up on the political track as the Obama administration searches for an exit strategy. Clearly, Mr. Karzai has emerged as a factor on the chessboard whom the U.S. cannot take for granted. On the one hand, Mr. Karzai has lined up the Northern Alliance with him as well as the erstwhile Mujahideen. On the other hand, in Mr. Sherzai, he has an ally who seeks the empowerment of tribes — making deals with tribal leaders is central to his political programme — and negotiation with the Taliban, who is, therefore, broadly in sync with Mr. Obama’s thinking. No doubt, Mr. Sherzai knows the insurgent enemy well. Taliban supreme leader Mullah Omar disappeared from Kandahar in the chaotic days of October 2001 following a deal involving transfer of power to Mr. Sherzai.
In a March interview, Mr. Sherzai said, “I will approach all the tribal leaders to negotiate with the Taliban who have been brain-washed by other people. I won’t rely on fighting and destruction and air strikes. There are a lot of other ways to approach this other than fighting… Afghanistan is a tribal society and we can solve all the problems through jirgas [traditional tribal councils]. I will tell all of the people who are tired of fighting, to bring their Talibs to me and I will negotiate
M.K. Bhadrakumar
On the Afghan political theatre, without the opprobrium of western company, Hamid Karzai’s profile got a facelift.
In retrospect, U.S. President Barack Obama did a favour to Afghan President Hamid Karzai by excluding him from his charmed circle of movers and shakers who would wield clout with the new administration in Washington. Mr. Obama did not even converse with Mr. Karzai telephonically since he was sworn in U.S. President, though Afghanistan was the number one foreign policy priority of his presidency.
On the other hand, he deputed Vice-President Joseph Biden to Kabul to let it be known to Mr. Karzai that unless he governed better, the U.S. would rather seek a regime change. The Secretary-General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, Jaap de Hoop Schaffer, publicly chastised Mr. Karzai as if the Afghan leader was a mere vassal of the western alliance. It was an appalling breach of protocol as Mr. Schaffer, a one-time foreign minister himself, would know.
But Mr. Karzai has had the last laugh as he travelled to Washington from Kabul for an “intense” trilateral summit meeting with Mr. Obama and Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari on Thursday. Mr. Schaffer, Mr. Biden, and Mr. Obama — indeed, they all have something to ponder over this week. Clearly, Mr. Karzai is far from walking into the sunset. He seems poised to win the Afghan presidential election on August 20.
The supreme irony is that what probably helped Mr. Karzai more than anything else to successfully wrap up his re-election bid is that western politicians rubbished him and distanced themselves ostentatiously from him. On the Afghan political theatre, without the opprobrium of western company, Mr. Karzai’s profile got a facelift. He began gaining in credibility.
On Monday, Mr. Karzai formally registered his candidacy for the presidential election. The last date of filing nominations ends by the weekend. No gladiator has appeared to challenge him. His vice-presidential running mates will be two stalwarts of the erstwhile anti-Taliban Northern Alliance, Muhammad Fahim Qasim from Panjshir and Muhammad Karim Khalili from Hazarajat. It is no doubt a dream-ticket. Mr. Fahim brings in Tajik support in good measure, while Mr. Khalili is the unquestioned leader of the Hazara Shi’ites in Bamyan. Mr. Karzai himself, of course, is the proud scion of a powerful Pashtun tribe. Conceivably, the Karzai-Fahim-Khalili ticket may enjoy a back-to-back understanding with Uzbek strongman Abdul Rashid Dostum and Hazara commander Mohammad Mohaqiq from the Amu Darya region in northern Afghanistan.
Mr. Karzai’s ticket has several engrossing features. It is of course multi-ethnic, multicultural and inter-regional. Second, it has the potential to rally the Mujahideen. Both Mr. Fahim and Mr. Khalili were notable Mujahideen leaders. They have extensive networking with the Mujahideen leaders — including with ideologically disparate figures like Rasul Sayyaf or Gulbuddin Hekmatyar — who still form a significant constituency.
Third, their role in the anti- Taliban resistance is too well-known to be reiterated. Their presence in the top echelons of the power structure will underscore the imperative of an inclusive, broad-based government as part of any settlement with the Taliban. Fourth, Mr. Fahim and Mr. Khalili are truly “sons of the soil”. They may lack Karzai’s sartorial skill, English fluency, urbaneness and panache for diplomacy, but they stuck it out through the 30-year civil war. Also, they bring in something that Mr. Karzai himself lacks. They are both experienced commanders with sizeable followings and can significantly contribute to the “Afghanisation” of the war. Mr. Fahim also headed the intelligence wing of the Northern Shura under Ahmed Shah Massoud.
Besides, Mr. Karzai has in Mr. Fahim a running mate who is known to the Russians and in Mr. Khalili an “Ustad” who enjoyed the respect and backing of the Iranians. With Mr. Fahim and Mr. Khalili coming on board, Mr. Karzai has virtually ensured that there cannot be any unified opposition arrayed against his candidacy.
Mr. Karzai’s success offers some salutary lessons about Afghan politics. In essence, he spent the past few weeks in backroom negotiations — Afghan style — cutting deals with onetime adversaries, manoeuvring through minefields, reconciling contradictions, and compromising or bartering influence and power with political bosses. The high point was reached on Saturday when Gul Agha Sherzai, the popular governor of Nangarhar, who was expected to announce his candidacy this week, dropped by to meet Mr. Karzai in the presidential palace in Kabul.
The two Pashtun leaders were closeted for over four hours after which Mr. Sherzai emerged with a gem of a statement. He said: “I visited the president, and hugged his little son and decided to withdraw my candidacy. I will neither lead this [opposition] alliance nor announce my candidacy for the presidential election.”
Mr. Sherzai wouldn’t say more about his sudden change of heart. Instead, in a flamboyant show of indifference to all power, Mr. Sherzai said he would also resign as governor. Whereupon, the presidential spokesman in Kabul came up with a response that “The president of Afghanistan appreciated Gul Agha Sherzai’s announcement he will not run in the presidential election, and called it a positive step towards improving the government and unity of the people of Afghanistan”.
He added, “Hamid Karzai sees Gul Agha Sherzai as a very fine and hardworking governor and a good adviser, and rejects his resignation.” The political tremor ensuing from Mr. Sherzai’s change of heart will force a rethink on the other potential contenders in the election on August 20, who include Zalmay Khalilzad, former U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan who is popularly seen by Afghans as the “American candidate”, Ashraf Ghani, yet another U.S.-based contender who was also a former finance minister, Ali Jalali, former interior minister and Abdullah Abdullah, former foreign minister who used to be Massoud’s aide.
It doesn’t take much ingenuity to comprehend that with Mr. Sherzai’s reconciliation, Mr. Karzai has brought into his candidacy an axis of two powerful Pashtun tribes from the Kandahar and Nangarhar regions, the heartland of Pashtun nationalism.
The Afghan experience with democracy offers a good lesson for Mr. Obama: it is best to leave the Afghans to broker power-sharing on their own terms according to their own ethos and traditions. Be a facilitator if you wish, but never a dictator. Conceivably, unlike in 2001 when Mr. Karzai appeared as the U.S.’s choice, or in 2004 when the U.S. choreographed his election, this time around, if he indeed manages to win a mandate through his own efforts, he will enjoy a degree of legitimacy that Mr. Obama could never hope to confer on him. Arguably, Mr. Karzai is set to graduate to the league of Iraq’s Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
True, as Mr. Biden took leave of Kabul, he left behind a widespread impression in the Afghan bazaar that divested of Washington’s political support, Mr. Karzai’s days were numbered. Mr. Karzai has since made an extraordinary recovery in his standing. If a marker is to be put on the reversal of Mr. Karzai’s political fortunes, it could be dated January 20 when Mr. Obama ignored Mr. Karzai and instead invited four other Afghan politicians to attend his inaugural in Washington.
Curiously, those four Afghans included Mr. Sherzai and Mr. Abdullah who since figured as presidential hopefuls until last Saturday when Mr. Sherzai — the formerly drug-tainted warlord who resembles a rotund, feudal king and impressed with Mr. Obama, who once enjoyed a close relationship with Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence — travelled to Kabul, hugged Mr. Karzai’s two-year old son and decided it was simply not worth his while to contest an election against the little boy’s father.
Peering through the looking glass, what lies ahead? In the event of Mr. Karzai winning a fresh term as President, which is almost certain by now, all sorts of possibilities open up on the political track as the Obama administration searches for an exit strategy. Clearly, Mr. Karzai has emerged as a factor on the chessboard whom the U.S. cannot take for granted. On the one hand, Mr. Karzai has lined up the Northern Alliance with him as well as the erstwhile Mujahideen. On the other hand, in Mr. Sherzai, he has an ally who seeks the empowerment of tribes — making deals with tribal leaders is central to his political programme — and negotiation with the Taliban, who is, therefore, broadly in sync with Mr. Obama’s thinking. No doubt, Mr. Sherzai knows the insurgent enemy well. Taliban supreme leader Mullah Omar disappeared from Kandahar in the chaotic days of October 2001 following a deal involving transfer of power to Mr. Sherzai.
In a March interview, Mr. Sherzai said, “I will approach all the tribal leaders to negotiate with the Taliban who have been brain-washed by other people. I won’t rely on fighting and destruction and air strikes. There are a lot of other ways to approach this other than fighting… Afghanistan is a tribal society and we can solve all the problems through jirgas [traditional tribal councils]. I will tell all of the people who are tired of fighting, to bring their Talibs to me and I will negotiate
Hard act to follow
Associate Justice David Souter of the United States Supreme Court has announced his intention to retire from the nine-judge bench. He was nominated by the senior George Bush in 1990 in the expectation that he would agree with the conservative nominees of Presidents Ford and Reagan. Instead, he delivered a series of opinions that weighed all the arguments meticulously and infuriated the neoconservatives who dominated American life for a quarter of a century. In McCreary County (2005), Justice Souter held that displays of the Ten Commandments in courthouses and public schools amounted to governmental endorsement of religion and violated the constitutional separation of faith and the state. In Casey (1992), he preserved the main abortion rights created in the landmark Roe v Wade case in 1973. In 2003, he joined a majority decision upholding the University of Michigan’s affirmative action admissions policy. In New London (2005), Justice Souter upheld the taking of private land by a public authority for the purpose of reviving the local economy. Those close to him have revealed that he was deeply disturbed by the 5-4 ruling in Bush v Gore (2000), seeing it as a crudely partisan decision to suspend the Florida recount and hand the U.S. presidency to George W. Bush. The decision to retire may have been partly motivated by that ruling.
Some of the public bitterness over the Florida episode reflected the perception that the winner of the presidency might get a chance to nominate as many as four new justices, whose rulings would shape American society for decades to come. In the event, President Bush had the opportunity to nominate only two judges, the hard-Right Samuel Alito and the current Chief Justice, John Roberts. As for Justice Souter’s successor, the substantial Democrat majority in the Senate means the new nominee will be confirmed without difficulty. Only two women have ever been Supreme Court justices and President Barack Obama is widely expected to nominate a woman of high judicial calibre and liberal views. The far-Right can be counted upon to attack virtually any nomination as ideologically motivated. But that only confirms that for them, the Supreme Court is primarily a vehicle for their agenda. Mr. Obama was not exaggerating when he asserted that this nomination would be among his most important duties as President. As for Justice Souter, history will remember him as a jurist of integrity and independence who will be a hard act to follow
Associate Justice David Souter of the United States Supreme Court has announced his intention to retire from the nine-judge bench. He was nominated by the senior George Bush in 1990 in the expectation that he would agree with the conservative nominees of Presidents Ford and Reagan. Instead, he delivered a series of opinions that weighed all the arguments meticulously and infuriated the neoconservatives who dominated American life for a quarter of a century. In McCreary County (2005), Justice Souter held that displays of the Ten Commandments in courthouses and public schools amounted to governmental endorsement of religion and violated the constitutional separation of faith and the state. In Casey (1992), he preserved the main abortion rights created in the landmark Roe v Wade case in 1973. In 2003, he joined a majority decision upholding the University of Michigan’s affirmative action admissions policy. In New London (2005), Justice Souter upheld the taking of private land by a public authority for the purpose of reviving the local economy. Those close to him have revealed that he was deeply disturbed by the 5-4 ruling in Bush v Gore (2000), seeing it as a crudely partisan decision to suspend the Florida recount and hand the U.S. presidency to George W. Bush. The decision to retire may have been partly motivated by that ruling.
Some of the public bitterness over the Florida episode reflected the perception that the winner of the presidency might get a chance to nominate as many as four new justices, whose rulings would shape American society for decades to come. In the event, President Bush had the opportunity to nominate only two judges, the hard-Right Samuel Alito and the current Chief Justice, John Roberts. As for Justice Souter’s successor, the substantial Democrat majority in the Senate means the new nominee will be confirmed without difficulty. Only two women have ever been Supreme Court justices and President Barack Obama is widely expected to nominate a woman of high judicial calibre and liberal views. The far-Right can be counted upon to attack virtually any nomination as ideologically motivated. But that only confirms that for them, the Supreme Court is primarily a vehicle for their agenda. Mr. Obama was not exaggerating when he asserted that this nomination would be among his most important duties as President. As for Justice Souter, history will remember him as a jurist of integrity and independence who will be a hard act to follow
Deaths do them part
Nothing illustrates the double standards Washington applies to the issue of civilian casualties in conflict zones more sharply than the contrast between its high moral ground on Sri Lanka and its apologetics for Monday’s airstrike on two villages in Farah province that killed more than 100 innocent men, women, and children — easily the worst such incident since the start of the Afghan war in October 2001. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said the U.S. 220;deeply, deeply regrets” the loss of civilian lives but U.S. military commanders on the ground have questioned the assumption that the U.S. was to blame for the Farah incident. There is no indication at all that the Pentagon intends to re-evaluate its deadly use of close air support in skirmishes with the Taliban. Statistics collated by Professor Marc Herold of the University of New Hampshire demonstrate the correlation between civilian casualties and the use of air power. His carefully verified data indicate that the number of Afghan civilians killed in U.S.-NATO military actions between January 1 and April 8, 2009 was around 200. He predicts that the civilian casualties will rise markedly under President Barack Obama’s ‘surge.’ The use of ground troops in combat operations against the Taliban tends to reduce civilian deaths but at the cost of a higher number of occupation soldier lives. Reliance on air-dropped ordnance helps the U.S. minimise its own casualty rate but the resentment the mounting civilian toll causes means the American body bag count will only increase in the long run.
Given the civilian casualties, the unpopularity of the occupation and the political regime it spawned, and the resurgence of the Taliban, the odds are loaded against Mr. Obama’s ‘AfPak’ strategy. Even from the military point of view, a sensible via media is not a surge of American boots on the ground — but an adequately staffed, trained, and equipped Afghan national army that can effectively take on the Taliban and al-Qaeda. The small change provided so far for strengthening the Afghan army is the weakest element in the U.S. strategy. That said, Washington also needs to maintain the pressure it is exerting on Islamabad to keep up its side of the operations against the Taliban. As extremists make inroads into the NWFP and elsewhere, Pakistan has been paying a heavy price for taking the fight against terrorism lightly. It will take more than a photo-op with the presidents of Afghanistan and Pakistan for Mr. Obama to rescue the desperate situation. Deadly force is being used west of the Durand Line, where its effects are counterproductive, while to the east, the fight against militant extremists is being handled with kid gloves. Monday’s horrors suggest that it may all end in a debacle for Mr. Obama’s surge and his plans for eliminating the Taliban
Nothing illustrates the double standards Washington applies to the issue of civilian casualties in conflict zones more sharply than the contrast between its high moral ground on Sri Lanka and its apologetics for Monday’s airstrike on two villages in Farah province that killed more than 100 innocent men, women, and children — easily the worst such incident since the start of the Afghan war in October 2001. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said the U.S. 220;deeply, deeply regrets” the loss of civilian lives but U.S. military commanders on the ground have questioned the assumption that the U.S. was to blame for the Farah incident. There is no indication at all that the Pentagon intends to re-evaluate its deadly use of close air support in skirmishes with the Taliban. Statistics collated by Professor Marc Herold of the University of New Hampshire demonstrate the correlation between civilian casualties and the use of air power. His carefully verified data indicate that the number of Afghan civilians killed in U.S.-NATO military actions between January 1 and April 8, 2009 was around 200. He predicts that the civilian casualties will rise markedly under President Barack Obama’s ‘surge.’ The use of ground troops in combat operations against the Taliban tends to reduce civilian deaths but at the cost of a higher number of occupation soldier lives. Reliance on air-dropped ordnance helps the U.S. minimise its own casualty rate but the resentment the mounting civilian toll causes means the American body bag count will only increase in the long run.
Given the civilian casualties, the unpopularity of the occupation and the political regime it spawned, and the resurgence of the Taliban, the odds are loaded against Mr. Obama’s ‘AfPak’ strategy. Even from the military point of view, a sensible via media is not a surge of American boots on the ground — but an adequately staffed, trained, and equipped Afghan national army that can effectively take on the Taliban and al-Qaeda. The small change provided so far for strengthening the Afghan army is the weakest element in the U.S. strategy. That said, Washington also needs to maintain the pressure it is exerting on Islamabad to keep up its side of the operations against the Taliban. As extremists make inroads into the NWFP and elsewhere, Pakistan has been paying a heavy price for taking the fight against terrorism lightly. It will take more than a photo-op with the presidents of Afghanistan and Pakistan for Mr. Obama to rescue the desperate situation. Deadly force is being used west of the Durand Line, where its effects are counterproductive, while to the east, the fight against militant extremists is being handled with kid gloves. Monday’s horrors suggest that it may all end in a debacle for Mr. Obama’s surge and his plans for eliminating the Taliban
Friday, May 1, 2009
ரஹ்மானின் பாராட்டு விழா என்னாச்சு..?
ரஹ்மானின் பாராட்டு விழா என்னாச்சு.
.?வாராது வந்த மாமணி போல் முதல் முறையிலேயே 2 ஆஸ்கார் விருதுகளைத் தட்டிக் கொண்டு வந்த ஏ.ஆர்.ரஹ்மானுக்கு தமிழ்ச் சினிமாவுலகம் இன்னமும் முறைப்படியான பாராட்டுவிழா நடத்தவில்லை.இசையமைப்பாளர்கள் சங்கத்தினர் மட்டுமே தங்களது பிள்ளைக்கு பாராட்டுக் கூட்டம் நடத்தி மகிழ்ந்திருக்கிறார்கள். மற்றபடி அரசுத் தரப்புக்கு இப்போதைக்கு இதில் ஆர்வமில்லையாம்.. விமான நிலையத்திற்கே நேரில் சென்று வரவேற்ற அமைச்சர் பரிதிக்கு ரஹ்மான் தரப்பில் இருந்து சரியான வரவேற்பும், மரியாதையும் கிடைக்கவில்லை என்கிறார்கள். இதோடு கூடவே தேர்தல் வேலைகள் நடப்பதாலும் கண்டு கொள்ளாமல் இருக்கிறார்கள்.கலைஞரை அழைக்காமலோ, அல்லது அவரை விட்டுவிட்டோ எப்படி நிகழ்ச்சியை நடத்துவது என்று திரையுலகத் தலைகளுக்குக் குழப்பம். அவருக்கோ உடல் நிலை சரியில்லை என்பதாலும், விழா என்றால் 4 மணி நேரமாவது அவரை அமர வைத்திருக்க வேண்டுமே என்பதாலும் அக்கறை கொள்ளாமல் இருக்கிறார்கள். எப்படியும் கலைஞர் டிவிக்குத்தான் ஒளிபரப்பு உரிமை தரப்பட வேண்டி வரும். கலைஞர் இல்லாமல் எப்படி என்று யோசிக்கிறார்களாம் கலைஞர்கள் சங்கத்தின் பிரதிநிதிகள்.. ரஹ்மானும் கலைஞரை வீடு தேடிப் போய் இன்னமும் பார்க்கவில்லை என்பதும் பெரும் குற்றமாகக் கருதப்படுகிறதாம்.. பாவம் ரஹ்மான்.. அவருக்கு இந்த அரசியலெல்லாம் தெரியுமா என்ன..? ரஹ்மானோ பல்வேறு கல்லூரிகள், அமைப்புகள் அழைத்த பாராட்டு விழா அழைப்புகளையெல்லாம் தவிர்த்துவிட்டு, தினமும் ஒவ்வொரு ஊருக்கு நேர்த்திக் கடன் என்று சொல்லித் தப்பித்து ஓடிக் கொண்டிருக்கிறார்."உச்ச நடிகர்களும், பிரபலங்களும் ரஹ்மானின் வீடு தேடிப் போய் வாழ்த்தியிருக்க வேண்டும். அதைவிட்டுவிட்டு போனிலேயே பாதிப் பேர் வாழ்த்துச் சொல்லி அவரை அவமானப்படுத்திவிட்டார்கள்.. இந்நேரம் கமலஹாசனுக்கு இந்த விருது கிடைத்திருந்தால் இப்படி விட்டிருப்பார்களா..?" என்று இசைக் கலைஞர் ஒருவர் வடபழனியில் ‘சங்கத்து வாசலில் நின்று கத்திக் கொண்டிருக்கிறார்.இதையெல்லாம் கேக்குறதுக்கு யாருக்கு இங்க நேரமிருக்கு..?
.?வாராது வந்த மாமணி போல் முதல் முறையிலேயே 2 ஆஸ்கார் விருதுகளைத் தட்டிக் கொண்டு வந்த ஏ.ஆர்.ரஹ்மானுக்கு தமிழ்ச் சினிமாவுலகம் இன்னமும் முறைப்படியான பாராட்டுவிழா நடத்தவில்லை.இசையமைப்பாளர்கள் சங்கத்தினர் மட்டுமே தங்களது பிள்ளைக்கு பாராட்டுக் கூட்டம் நடத்தி மகிழ்ந்திருக்கிறார்கள். மற்றபடி அரசுத் தரப்புக்கு இப்போதைக்கு இதில் ஆர்வமில்லையாம்.. விமான நிலையத்திற்கே நேரில் சென்று வரவேற்ற அமைச்சர் பரிதிக்கு ரஹ்மான் தரப்பில் இருந்து சரியான வரவேற்பும், மரியாதையும் கிடைக்கவில்லை என்கிறார்கள். இதோடு கூடவே தேர்தல் வேலைகள் நடப்பதாலும் கண்டு கொள்ளாமல் இருக்கிறார்கள்.கலைஞரை அழைக்காமலோ, அல்லது அவரை விட்டுவிட்டோ எப்படி நிகழ்ச்சியை நடத்துவது என்று திரையுலகத் தலைகளுக்குக் குழப்பம். அவருக்கோ உடல் நிலை சரியில்லை என்பதாலும், விழா என்றால் 4 மணி நேரமாவது அவரை அமர வைத்திருக்க வேண்டுமே என்பதாலும் அக்கறை கொள்ளாமல் இருக்கிறார்கள். எப்படியும் கலைஞர் டிவிக்குத்தான் ஒளிபரப்பு உரிமை தரப்பட வேண்டி வரும். கலைஞர் இல்லாமல் எப்படி என்று யோசிக்கிறார்களாம் கலைஞர்கள் சங்கத்தின் பிரதிநிதிகள்.. ரஹ்மானும் கலைஞரை வீடு தேடிப் போய் இன்னமும் பார்க்கவில்லை என்பதும் பெரும் குற்றமாகக் கருதப்படுகிறதாம்.. பாவம் ரஹ்மான்.. அவருக்கு இந்த அரசியலெல்லாம் தெரியுமா என்ன..? ரஹ்மானோ பல்வேறு கல்லூரிகள், அமைப்புகள் அழைத்த பாராட்டு விழா அழைப்புகளையெல்லாம் தவிர்த்துவிட்டு, தினமும் ஒவ்வொரு ஊருக்கு நேர்த்திக் கடன் என்று சொல்லித் தப்பித்து ஓடிக் கொண்டிருக்கிறார்."உச்ச நடிகர்களும், பிரபலங்களும் ரஹ்மானின் வீடு தேடிப் போய் வாழ்த்தியிருக்க வேண்டும். அதைவிட்டுவிட்டு போனிலேயே பாதிப் பேர் வாழ்த்துச் சொல்லி அவரை அவமானப்படுத்திவிட்டார்கள்.. இந்நேரம் கமலஹாசனுக்கு இந்த விருது கிடைத்திருந்தால் இப்படி விட்டிருப்பார்களா..?" என்று இசைக் கலைஞர் ஒருவர் வடபழனியில் ‘சங்கத்து வாசலில் நின்று கத்திக் கொண்டிருக்கிறார்.இதையெல்லாம் கேக்குறதுக்கு யாருக்கு இங்க நேரமிருக்கு..?
என் இனிய வலைத்தமிழ் மக்களே..!எத்தனை எத்தனை அரசியல்வாதிகள் புதிது புதிதாக படையெடுத்து வந்தாலும், எத்தனை பேர் தங்களது வாய்ப்பேச்சுக்களையும், வீறாப்புக்களையும் காட்டி எகத்தாளமிட்டாலும் அரசியல் சதிராட்டத்தில் தன்னை மிஞ்ச ஆளில்லை என்பதை மீண்டும் ஒரு முறை நிரூபித்திருக்கிறார் கலைஞர்.ஏதோ தான் சொன்னால்தான்.. சொன்னவுடன்தான் மத்திய அரசு போர்க்குணத்துடன் செயல்படும்.. முடிவெடுக்கும்.. என்று அவர் தனக்குத்தானே வஞ்சப் புகழ்ச்சி பாடிக் கொள்வது அவரது வாழ்க்கையில் 11 கோடியே 11 லட்சத்து 1 ஆயிரத்து 111-வது முறை என்பது அவரது அரசியல் வாழ்க்கையை பின் தொடர்ந்து வந்தவர்களுக்கு நன்றாகவே தெரியும்.இப்போது ஒரு நாளில் 6 மணி நேர உண்ணாவிரதத்தினால் போர் நிறுத்தம் ஏற்பட்டது என்று புளகாங்கிதமடைந்து வெற்றியோடு அவர் வீடு போய் சேர்ந்திருக்கிறார். அடுத்த 3 மணி நேரத்தில் மீண்டும் தாக்குதல் தொடுத்துள்ளது இலங்கை ராணுவம். அன்றைக்கு மட்டும் 272 பேர் பலியாகியிருக்கிறார்கள். இதில் எங்கே போர் நிறுத்தம் இருக்கிறது என்று தெரியவில்லை. அவர்தான் தமிழ் கற்றறிந்த தமிழராச்சே.. சொல்லட்டும்..!ஐயாவின் வெற்றிச் செய்தியும், “யார் சொன்னது போர் நிறுத்தம் என்று..?” என்று ராஜபக்சே கொக்கரிக்கும் செய்தியும் ஒரே பத்திரிகையில் ஒரே பக்கத்தில்தான் வெளியாகியிருந்தது.. படித்தாரோ படிக்கவில்லையோ.. அல்லது “வனவாசத்தை” படிக்கவே இல்லை என்று உலகமகா புரூடா விட்டதுபோல் இதையும் படிக்கவில்லை என்று சொல்வாரோ தெரியவில்லை.ஆனாலும் எனக்கு இதில் புரியாத இன்னொரு விஷயம்.. எதிர்க்கட்சிகளின் பல்வேறு வகையான போராட்டங்கள்.. பொதுமக்களின் எதிர்ப்புகள்.. மாணவர்களின் ஆர்ப்பாட்டங்கள்.. எல்லாவற்றிற்கும் மேலாக 14 வீரத் தமிழர்கள் தங்களது உயிரை தீக்கு இரையாக்கியிருக்கிற கொடுமைகள். இவை எல்லாமே நடந்தும் அசைந்து கொடுக்காத மத்திய அரசு, முதல்வருக்கு மட்டுமே இந்த அளவுக்காவது அசைந்து கொடுக்கிறது என்றால் போராடிய மக்களையும், போராட்டம் நடத்திய எதிர்க்கட்சிகளையும், தீக்குளித்த அப்பாவிகளையும் இந்த அரசுகள் என்னவென்று நினைக்கிறார்கள்.?இறந்தவர்களெல்லாம் விலங்குகள் என்றா..? எதிர்க்கட்சியினர் அனைவரும் மனிதர்களே அல்ல.. வேற்று நாட்டவர் என்றா..? சென்ற தேர்தலில் ஓட்டுப் போட்டு இந்தியக் குடிமகன் என்ற பொறுப்பைச் செய்திருக்கும் பல்வேறு தரப்பட்ட மனிதர்களும்தான் இந்தக் கொடுமையை எதிர்த்துக் குரல் கொடுத்தபடியே வந்திருக்கிறார்களே.. அவர்களெல்லாம் யாராம்..? தி.மு.க.வும், அதன் தலைவரும் மட்டும்தான் மனிதர்கள்.. இந்தியர்கள்.. தமிழர்கள்.. மற்றவர்களையெல்லாம் கண்டு கொள்ளவே வேண்டாம் என்று மத்திய அரசு நினைப்பது இதிலிருந்தே தெள்ளத் தெளிவாகத் தெரிகிறது.. இதிலிருந்தே இவர்களது ஆட்சியின் லட்சணமும், மக்கள் பற்றிய அவர்களது மிருகத்தனமான நிலைப்பாடும் தெரிகிறது, புரிகிறது..இதேபோல் அதே இடத்தில் நான் ஒரு இந்தியன்.. நான் ஒரு தமிழன் எனக்கும் உண்ணாவிரதம் இருக்க உரிமை உண்டு.. நான் இருப்பேன் என்று சொல்லி நான் மேடை போட்டு அமர்ந்தால் அரசு என்ன செய்யும்..? அனுமதிக்குமா..? ஆள்பவருக்கு ஒரு சட்டம்..! பொதுமக்களுக்கு ஒரு சட்டமா..? எந்த ஒரு போராட்டமாக இருந்தாலும் 3 நாட்களுக்கு முன்பாகவே அனுமதி பெற்றாக வேண்டும் என்று சொல்லி போராட்டக் குணங்களையும், போராட்டக்காரர்களையும் நெருக்கி வரும் இந்த அதிகார வர்க்கம், இப்போது மட்டும் வாய் மூடிவிட்டது ஏனாம்..?“நான் சொன்னால் மட்டும்தான் அங்கே சாவு நிக்கும்.. நான் சொன்னால் மட்டும்தான் படுகொலைகள் மட்டுப்படுத்தப்படும்.. நான் சொன்னால் மட்டும்தான் உதவித் தொகைகள் வழங்கப்படும் என்று எதற்கெடுத்தாலும் நான்.. தான்.. நான்தான்.. என்னால்தான்..” என்று மண்டைக் காய்ச்சலால் கலைஞரால் நடத்தப்படும் அனைத்து நிகழ்ச்சிகளையும் பார்க்கின்றபோது இந்த மாதிரியான ஒரு தற்பெருமைக்காரரை உலகத்தில் எந்தவொரு மூலையிலும், எந்தவொரு இனத்திலும் பார்த்திருக்கவே முடியாது என்றே தோன்றுகிறது.. “ஈழத் தமிழர்களுக்காக பழ.நெடுமாறன் அனுப்பிய உதவித் தொகைகளை ஏற்க முடியாது.. அதை யாரிடம் கொண்டுபோய் கொடுப்பது..?” என்று எகத்தாளமாகச் சொன்ன கலைஞர், பின்பு தி.மு.க.வின் சார்பில் அனுப்பப்பட்ட உதவிகளை மட்டும் பக்குவமாக இலங்கை அரசிடம் கொண்டு போய்ச் சேர்த்தாரே.. இது மட்டும் எப்படியாம்..?இந்த இரண்டு நிகழ்வுகளுக்கும் இடையில் பசி, பட்டினியால் இறந்து போனவர்களுக்கு கலைஞர்தானே பொறுப்பாளி.. அந்த நேரத்தில் பட்டினியால் இறந்து போன தமிழர்களைச் சாகடித்த பெருமையும் இவரைத்தானே போய் சேர்கிறது.. ‘தமிழர்களை பட்டினி கொண்டான்' என்ற பட்டத்தையும் இனிமேல் இவர் தன்னுடன் பெருமையாகச் சேர்த்துக் கொள்ளலாம். 1111-வது பட்டமாக இருந்துவிட்டுப் போகட்டும்..!தற்போது நடப்பவைகளைப் பாருங்கள்.. ஏதோ தன்னுடைய ஆட்சியில் மனித உரிமைகள் மிகவும் மதிக்கப்படுகின்றன என்றும், அம்மா ஆட்சியில் அது காணாமல் போயிருந்தது என்றும் எகத்தாளமிடும் இவர் என்ன செய்து கொண்டிருக்கிறார்..?ஈழப் போராட்டத்திற்கான ஆதரவை யார் எந்த ரூபத்தில் நடத்தினாலும் ஆதரிப்பதை விட்டுவிட்டு அதை ஒடுக்கி, மத்திய அரசுக்கு ஒரு விசுவாசமான ஊழியனாக, இனத் துரோகியாகத் தன்னைக் காட்டிக் கொள்வதிலேயே 24 மணி நேரத்தையும் செலவழித்து வருகிறார் இந்தப் புண்ணியவான்.ஈழத்தில் நடப்பது என்ன என்கின்ற முழக்கத்தோடு ஈழப் போரில் பாதிக்கப்பட்டுள்ள மக்களின் புகைப்படங்களோடு, உண்மை நிலவரத்தை வெளிப்படுத்தும் நோக்கத்தில் பல்வேறு குழுக்களால் தமிழ்நாட்டில் வெளியிடப்பட்டுள்ள பிரச்சார சிடிக்களை பறிமுதல் செய்து அதை வைத்திருந்தவர்களை, தயாரித்தவர்களை கூண்டோடு கைது செய்து சிறையில் அடைக்கிறார். இவரா ஈழத்தமிழர்களுக்கு உதவுபவர்..?கேட்டால் “தேர்தல் கமிஷனிடம் அனுமதி பெறவில்லை” என்கிறார். என்ன முட்டாள்தனம் இது..? ஈழப் போராட்டத்திற்கும், தேர்தலுக்கும் என்னங்கய்யா சம்பந்தம் இருக்கு..? பாரதிராஜா நடத்திய போராட்டத்திலேயே இந்த சிடிக்கள் விநியோகம் செய்யப்பட்டன. அதை வாங்குவதற்காக மக்கள் முண்டியடித்து ஓடத் துவங்க.. மேடையில் பேசிக் கொண்டிருந்த தமிழருவி மணியன் தனது பேச்சை நிறுத்த வேண்டிய கட்டாயம் வந்தது. அப்போது மைக்கிற்கு முன்னால் ஓடி வந்த பாரதிராஜா, “சிடியை நிகழ்ச்சி முடிந்த பின்பு கொடுங்கள்” என்று கேட்டுக் கொண்ட பின்பும், சிடிக்கள் ரகசியமாக வரிசைக்கிரமமாக பாஸ் செய்யப்பட்டது. அவ்வளவு ஆர்வத்துடன் இருந்தனர் ஈழத்து ஆர்வலர்கள்.அந்த சிடிக்களில் அப்படியொன்றும் எந்தவிதமான ஆட்சேபணையான கருத்துக்களும், இந்திய இறையாண்மைக்கு எதிரான கருத்துக்களும் இல்லவே இல்லை. என்னிடம் கிடைத்த சிடியை போட்டுப் பார்த்ததில் அதில் முழுக்க முழுக்க ஈழப் போரில் பாதிக்கப்பட்டு, சிதைந்து போன தமிழ் மக்களின் புகைப்படங்களும், இந்தப் போருக்கு பின்புலமாக, பக்கபலமாக, ஆயுதங்களயும், பண உதவியையும், ஆள் உதவியையும் வழங்கி வருவது இந்திய அரசுதான் என்கிற தகவலும், புகைப்படங்களும் மட்டுமே இருக்கின்றன.இதைத்தானே வீதி, வீதியாக ஈழப் போராட்டத்துக்கு ஆதரவான தலைவர்கள் சொல்லி வருகிறார்கள். இதில் என்ன தவறு இருக்கிறது..? மேடை போட்டுச் சொல்லலாம்.. பேசலாம்... கத்தலாம். ஆனால் அதையே சிடிக்களாகத் தரக்கூடாது என்றால் இதற்கு என்ன அர்த்தம் என்று புரியவில்லை. எதற்காக இந்தக் கைதுகள்..? சித்ரவதைகள்.. பறிமுதல்கள்.?கலைஞர் உண்மையான உணர்வோடு இருந்திருந்தால் இந்த சிடிக்களை அவரே வெளியிட்டிருக்க வேண்டு்ம்.. அதுதான் முறையானது.. எம்.ஜி.ஆர். அமெரிக்காவில் மருத்துவமனையில் இருந்தபோது “அவர் கிட்டத்தட்ட செத்துவிட்டார்..” என்றும், “உயிரோடு வந்தாலும் இனிமேல் அவரால் பேச முடியாது.. எழுத முடியாது.. நடக்க முடியாது.. முடமாகிவிட்டார்.. இதோ பாருங்கள் ஆதாரங்கள்..” என்று முரசொலியில் புகைப்படங்களை வெளியிட்டு அதனை நோட்டீஸாகவும் அச்சடித்து வெளியிட்டார்களே.. இது எந்த வகையான ஜனநாயகமாம்..? இதற்கு ஐயா யாரிடம் அனுமதி வாங்கினாராம்..?வி.பி.சிங் பிரதமர் ஆன தேர்தலின்போது தெருத்தெருவாக போபர்ஸ் ஊழல் வழக்குகள் பற்றி புத்தகங்களையும், நோட்டீஸ்களையும் வெளியிட்டார்களே.. அப்போது எந்த உரிமையில், எந்த சட்டத்தின்கீழ் இதை செய்தார் கலைஞர்.. அவருக்கு ஒரு நியாயம்.. மற்றவர்களுக்கு ஒரு நியாயமா..?ஜெயலலிதாவின் கொடூரமான முதல் ஐந்தாண்டு கால ஆட்சிக்குப் பின் வந்த தேர்தலின்போது அம்மாவும், உடன்பிறவா சகோதரியும் நகை, நட்டுக்களுடன் போஸ் கொடுத்த காட்சியை தேடியெடுத்து ஊர், ஊராக நோட்டீஸ் அடித்து ஒட்டினார்களே தி.மு.க.காரர்கள்.. இதற்கு யாரிடமாவது அனுமதி வாங்கினாரா கலைஞர்..?சென்ற தேர்தலின்போது தனது ஆட்சிக் காலத்தில் செய்த சாதனைகள் என்று சொல்லி புத்தகங்களையும், சிடிக்களையும் தொகுதி, தொகுதியாக தி.மு.க.வினர் வெளியிட்டார்களே.. அப்போது எங்கே போனது இவரது சட்டம்..? அப்போது மட்டும் தேர்தல் கமிஷன் அனுமதி வாங்கிவிட்டுத்தான் அதனை செய்தாரா அவர்..? மக்கள் பணத்திலேயே கூட்டுக் கொள்ளையடித்துவிட்டு அதனையே சாதனையாக்கி வெளியிடுதைவிட, ஈழத்தில் அல்லல்படும் அப்பாவி மக்களின் துயரங்களை பட்டியலிடுவதும், இதனை உலக மக்களின் பார்வைக்குக் கொண்டு போவதும் பாவமான செயல் என்று கருதுகிறாரா இந்த உத்தமத் தலைவர்..?ஜெயலலிதாவை தாக்கி பேசினார்கள் என்ற காரணத்திற்காக விடுதலைவிரும்பி மற்றும் வெற்றி கொண்டானை கைது செய்து சிறையில் வைத்தபோது, பொங்கியெழுந்து தி.மு.க. தொண்டர்களுக்கு கடிதமெழுதி அவர்களை போராட வைத்து.. அவர்களது மண்டைகளை உடைக்க வைத்து.. அவர்களது ரத்தங்களை சிதற வைத்து.. அவர்களை சிறையில் தள்ள வைத்து.. அவர்களது குடும்பத்தினரை பதற வைத்து.. கடைசியில் அவர்கள் இருவரும் வெளியில் வந்தவுடன் எல்லாம் என்னுடைய போராட்டத்தினால்தான் என்று மார்தட்டிக் கொண்டாரே.. அப்போது மட்டும் அரசுக்கு எதிரான எதிர்ப்பை போராட்டமாகக் காட்டினால் அது தவறாக படவில்லையா இவருக்கு..?இவருடைய ஆதரவு ஆட்கள்தான் தமிழர்கள்.. மற்றவர்களெல்லாம் மயிருகளா..?இப்போது என்ன செய்கிறார் இந்த தமிழர் தலைவர்..? முறையான அனுமதியோடு நாகரிகமான பேச்சுக்களோடு, ஆழமான, உண்மையான கருத்துக்கள் அடங்கிய நோட்டீஸ்களோடு காங்கிரஸ் கட்சிக்கு எதிரான எதிர்ப்புக்களை தொகுதி மக்களிடத்தில் கொண்டு சென்ற தனி அமைப்புகளைச் சேர்ந்த தமிழர்களை.. பொறியியல் படிப்பு படித்த அந்த தமிழ் இளைஞர்களை.. கைது செய்து சிறையில் தள்ளியிருக்கிறாரே.. இதுவா ஜனநாயகம்..? தமிழ்த் திரைப்பட இயக்குநர்கள் தலைமையில் இனி ஒரு கூட்டம் காங்கிரஸுக்கு எதிராக களமிறங்கப் போவதையறிந்து அவர்களை வரவிடாமல் செய்வதற்காகவும், பயமுறுத்துவதற்காகவும் தமிழ்நாட்டின் பல இடங்களிலும் கைதுகள் தொடர்ந்த வண்ணம் இருக்கின்றன. இதுவான ஜனநாயகம்..? ஜனநாயகம் என்ற பெயரில் இந்த தலைவர் நடத்துகின்ற சர்வாதிகாரம்தான் இது.. கேட்டால் நான்தான் உலகத் தமிழர்களின் ஒப்பு விருப்பற்ற ஒரே தலைவன் என்கிறார். நான் சொல்வதுதான் தமிழர்களின் வேதவாக்கு என்கிறார். என்ன நடிப்புய்யா நடிக்கிறாரு மனுஷர்..? கவிதை எழுதும்போது ஒரு நடிப்பு.. பேசும்போது ஒரு நடிப்பு.. உறங்கும்போது ஒரு நடிப்பு. இப்போது உண்ணாவிரத்திலும் ஒரு நடிப்பு என்று சகலத்திலும் கை வைத்து நடிகர்களுக்கு வேலையில்லாமல் செய்துவிட்டார் இந்த மகா நடிகர்.இந்த செட்டப் உண்ணாவிரத்தை வெற்றிகரமாக முடித்துவிட்டு புன்னகையுடன் வீடு திரும்பியிருக்கிறார் கலைஞர்.கிட்டத்தட்ட அத்தனை தமிழர்களையும் ஒரு சேர பிடித்து முகாம்களில் அடைத்தாகிவிட்டது, என்கிற திருப்தியில் இருக்கிறார் நவீன கால ஹிட்லர் ராஜபக்சே.எப்படியோ தனது தாலிக்கயிறு பறி போனதுக்கு முக்கால்வாசி பழிக்குப் பழி வாங்கிவிட்டு கூடவே, எல்லாரையும் திருப்திப்படுத்தி பிரச்சினையை முடிச்சாச்சு என்ற அகோர திருப்தியில் இருக்கிறார் அன்னை சோனியா.. இவர்களுடைய வெட்கங்கெட்ட அரசியலுக்கு நடுவில் உற்றார், உறவினரை இழந்து, தாய், தகப்பனை இழந்து, குடும்பத்தினரை இழந்து, தாய் மண்ணை இழந்து தினந்தோறும் நூறு தமிழராவது செத்துக் கொண்டேயிருப்பார்கள்.. இதுதான் தமிழனின் சாபம்..!போங்கடா நீங்களும் உங்க கேடுகெட்ட அரசியலும்
SC lifts stay on trial of 2002 Gujarat riots cases
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Friday lifted the stay on trial of 2002 Gujarat riots cases and directed the setting up of fast track courts for holding it on a day-to-day basis.
The Supreme Court ordered the setting up of designated courts for riot cases in Ahmedabad, Anand, Sabarkanta, Mehsana and Gulbarga districts.
A bench headed by Justice Arijit Pasayat said it was necessary to hold day-to-day trial considering the fact that seven years have passed.
The court took into consideration the report filed by Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by former CBI director R K Raghavan which probed the cases.
The court said the Chief Justice of Gujarat High Court will appoint expert lawyers in criminal trial as public prosecutors for the trial of cases. The bench said it would be open for the chairman of the SIT to seek change of public prosecutors if any deficiency was found during the trial.
Further the chairman of SIT can make a request to the Advocate General of the State on the appointment of assistant public prosecutors to assist the public prosecutors, it said.
The SIT and its chairman will keep track of the trial and file quarterly report to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court also gave liberty to the SIT to recommend the cancellation of bail if it is considered necessary.
Expressing "happiness" over the court's order, Mr. Raghavan said, "I think it is going to facilitate the work of the SIT in Gujarat. I look forward to further work in that direction."
He said, "It is very humbling to know that the apex court has so much trust in me" and added that the court wanted him to ensure that witnesses were given due protection.
Noting that the SIT had submitted two reports giving the status of investigation, Mr. Raghavan said in some cases more arrests had been made.
Hoping early conclusion of the trials, he said "I can only say that no time will be lost...I am hoping that these will come to a conclusion in about a less than a year."
The Court said that the SIT will act as a nodal agency to decide as to which witnesses in the case should be given protection and relocated. It said the witnesses have to be provided security for their safe passage and if necessary at their place of living during the trial.
The court said that it would be for the Central para-military forces to provide security for the witnesses. It said the Central Government will make arrangements if relocation of witnesses was required. To avoid any unruly scenes during the trial process, the court will have to be stern.
The Bench gave liberty to the SIT to approach the Supreme Court at any stage for redressal of any grievances.
The Supreme court said that the SIT will file quarterly reports on the progress of the cases in sealed cover. The SIT, which has investigated 10 cases including the Godhra train burning and subsequent riots cases, had submitted its report before the Supreme court in March.
The Supreme Court had on March 26, 2008, constituted SIT which besides Raghavan as its head has former DG of UP Police C D Satpathy and three IPS officers from Gujarat Geeta Johri, Shivanand Jha and Ashish Bhatia as its members.
The SIT was asked to "inquire and investigate" cases relating to Godhra carnage in which 59 people were killed and subsequent riots in places like Godhra, Gulbarg Society in Ahmedabad, Naroda Gaon, Naroda Patiya and Sardarpura
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Friday lifted the stay on trial of 2002 Gujarat riots cases and directed the setting up of fast track courts for holding it on a day-to-day basis.
The Supreme Court ordered the setting up of designated courts for riot cases in Ahmedabad, Anand, Sabarkanta, Mehsana and Gulbarga districts.
A bench headed by Justice Arijit Pasayat said it was necessary to hold day-to-day trial considering the fact that seven years have passed.
The court took into consideration the report filed by Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by former CBI director R K Raghavan which probed the cases.
The court said the Chief Justice of Gujarat High Court will appoint expert lawyers in criminal trial as public prosecutors for the trial of cases. The bench said it would be open for the chairman of the SIT to seek change of public prosecutors if any deficiency was found during the trial.
Further the chairman of SIT can make a request to the Advocate General of the State on the appointment of assistant public prosecutors to assist the public prosecutors, it said.
The SIT and its chairman will keep track of the trial and file quarterly report to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court also gave liberty to the SIT to recommend the cancellation of bail if it is considered necessary.
Expressing "happiness" over the court's order, Mr. Raghavan said, "I think it is going to facilitate the work of the SIT in Gujarat. I look forward to further work in that direction."
He said, "It is very humbling to know that the apex court has so much trust in me" and added that the court wanted him to ensure that witnesses were given due protection.
Noting that the SIT had submitted two reports giving the status of investigation, Mr. Raghavan said in some cases more arrests had been made.
Hoping early conclusion of the trials, he said "I can only say that no time will be lost...I am hoping that these will come to a conclusion in about a less than a year."
The Court said that the SIT will act as a nodal agency to decide as to which witnesses in the case should be given protection and relocated. It said the witnesses have to be provided security for their safe passage and if necessary at their place of living during the trial.
The court said that it would be for the Central para-military forces to provide security for the witnesses. It said the Central Government will make arrangements if relocation of witnesses was required. To avoid any unruly scenes during the trial process, the court will have to be stern.
The Bench gave liberty to the SIT to approach the Supreme Court at any stage for redressal of any grievances.
The Supreme court said that the SIT will file quarterly reports on the progress of the cases in sealed cover. The SIT, which has investigated 10 cases including the Godhra train burning and subsequent riots cases, had submitted its report before the Supreme court in March.
The Supreme Court had on March 26, 2008, constituted SIT which besides Raghavan as its head has former DG of UP Police C D Satpathy and three IPS officers from Gujarat Geeta Johri, Shivanand Jha and Ashish Bhatia as its members.
The SIT was asked to "inquire and investigate" cases relating to Godhra carnage in which 59 people were killed and subsequent riots in places like Godhra, Gulbarg Society in Ahmedabad, Naroda Gaon, Naroda Patiya and Sardarpura
தற்போதுள்ள சூழ்நிலையில் இலங்கை தமிழர் பிரச்சினை குறித்து என்ன பேசினாலும் நம்முடைய சார்பு நிலையில் எல்லோருக்கும் சந்தேகம் வந்துவிடுகிறது. அதாவது புலிகளுக்கு ஆதரவு-இலங்கை தமிழருக்கு ஆதரவு அல்லது புலிகளுக்கு எதிர்ப்பு-இலங்கை அரசுக்கு ஆதரவு. இவை இரண்டைத்தவிர மற்றொரு நிலைப்பாடும் இருக்கக்கூடும், தேவையாக இருக்கிறது என்பதை பலரும் சிந்திக்கக்கூட மறுக்கிறார்கள். அரசியல் கட்சிகள் முதல்கொண்டு ஊடகங்கள் வரை தங்கள் ஆதாயத்துக்குகேற்றபடி நிலைப்பாட்டினை எடுக்கின்றன. பொதுபுத்தியில் படிந்துபோயுள்ள தமிழர் என்கிற இனவுணர்வைத் தூண்டி ஆதாயம் பெறப்பார்க்கின்றன. அறிவுஜீவிகள் என்று மார்தட்டிக் கொள்கிறவர்களின் செயல்பாடும் இப்படித்தான் உள்ளது. சாதி உணர்வு, மத உணர்வு எந்த அளவுக்கு பாரதூரமான விளைவுகளை ஏற்படுத்துமோ அதே அளவுக்கு கண்மூடித்தனமான இன உணர்வும் பக்க விளைவுகளை ஏற்படுத்தக்கூடியதே.
இலங்கை தமிழர் பிரச்சினையில் நாம் இப்போது செய்ய வேண்டியதெல்லாம் உணர்ச்சி வசப்படுவதை விட்டுவிட்டு அடுத்த நகர்வு குறித்து யோசிப்பதுதான். இன்னும் பல தசாப்தங்களுக்கு போரை நடத்திக்கொண்டிருப்பதா? போர் முடிவுக்கு வரும்பட்சத்தில் தமிழர், இலங்கையில் நிலையான அமைதியோடு வாழ வழிவகை என்ன? நம்முன் இருக்கும் கேள்விகள்…
நேபாளத்தில் ஜனநாயகத்தை ஏற்படுத்தி ஆயுத ஏந்திய மாவோயிஸ்டுகளின் அணுகுமுறையை இலங்கை பிரச்சினையில் புலிகள் ஏன் ஆராய்ந்து பார்க்கக்கூடாது? நேபாளத்தில் மன்னராட்சியும் நிலப்பிரபுத்துவமும் பிரச்சினைகள் என்றால் இலங்கையில் இருப்பது இனப்பிரச்சினை என்று மேலோட்டமாகப்பார்த்து தள்ளிவைக்காமல் இது குறித்து சிந்தனையும் விவாதமும் செய்ய வேண்டியிருக்கிறது. கடந்த ஆண்டு நேபாள அரசியல் நிர்ணநய சபைக்கான தேர்தலுக்குப் பார்வையாளராக சென்று வந்திருந்த புதுவை சுகுமாறனிடம் நான் கண்ட நேர்காணலின் சுருக்கப்பட்ட வடிவம் இது. நான் பணியாற்றிய வார இதழில் வெளியானது . சூழ்நிலை கருதி மீள்பிரசுரம் செய்கிறேன்.
மக்கள் ஆட்சியா, மன்னர் ஆட்சியா என்று புயல் வீசிக்கொண்டு இருந்த நேபாளத்தில் இப்போது ஜனநாயகக் காற்று! பத்தாண்டுகளாக நடந்த ஆயுதப் போராட்டத்தின் முடிவில், மாவோயிஸ்ட்கள் தலைமையிலான ஆட்சி அமைந்திருக்கிறது. நேபாள அரசியல் நிர்ணய சபைத் தேர்தலின் பார்வையாளராகச் சென்று வந்த மனித உரிமை ஆர்வலர் புதுவை கோ.சுகுமாறனுடன் ஒரு சந்திப்பு…
”ஆயுதம் தாங்கிய போராட்ட அமைப்பான மாவோயிஸ்ட்கள் நேபாளத் தேர்தலில் வெற்றி பெற்றிருக்கிறார்கள். எப்படி இது சாத்தியமாயிற்று?”
”நேபாள மக்களின் ஒரே வருமானம் சுற்றுலாதான். காட்மாண்டு நகரம், இரண்டு மலைகளுக்கு நடுவே கோடையிலும் கொப்பளிக்கும் நாராயணி ஆறு. இந்த இரண்டும் கொள்ளை அழகுடையவை. இருந்தாலும், ஏழ்மையும் வறுமையும்தான் நேபாளத்தின் உண்மையான முகம். விவசாயம் நொடித் துப்போன பல லட்சம் பேர் கூர்க்காக்களாக, இந்தியாவுக்கும் கொரியாவுக்கும் கிளம்பிவிடுகிறார்கள். கடந்த 240 ஆண்டுகளாக மன்னரைக் கடவுளாக நினைத்து, அவர் தங்களுக்கு நல்லது செய்வார் என்று நம்பிக்கொண்டு இருந்தவர்கள் நேபாள மக்கள். 1996ல் மன்னர் குடும்பத்துக்குள்ளேயே நடந்த படுகொலைகள் அந்த நம்பிக்கையை முதன்முறையாகத் தகர்த்தன. அதன் பிறகுதான் கட்சிகளின் மேல் மக்கள் நம்பிக்கை வைக்கத் தொடங்கினார்கள். மன்னராட்சிக்கு எதிரான போராட்டத்தை முன்னெடுத்துச் சென்றார்கள் மாவோயிஸ்ட்கள். கடந்த பத்தாண்டுகளாக நடந்த போராட்டத்தில் இரண்டு தரப்பிலும் சேர்த்து 12 ஆயிரம் பேர் உயிர் இழந்திருக்கிறார்கள். இரண்டு முறை தள்ளி வைக்கப்பட்டு, மூன்றாவது முறையாக அரசியல் நிர்ணய சபைக்கான தேர்தல் இப்போது நடந்தது. மாவோயிஸ்ட்கள் இதில் பெரும்பான்மையான இடங்களைப் பிடித்து வென்றதற்கு அரசியல்ரீதியாக நிறைய காரணங்கள் இருந்தாலும் அடித்தட்டு மக்களை ஒன்றிணைத்ததுதான் முக்கியமான காரணம்! தேர்தல் மிக அமைதியாக நடந்தது. கிட்டத்தட்ட 85 சதவிகித ஓட்டுப்பதிவு நடந்தது. ரொம்பவும் சாதாரணமாக மரத்தடியில் ஓட்டுப் பெட்டியை வைத்திருந்தார்கள். ஓட்டு எண்ணுவதும்கூட அதீத பாதுகாப்பு இல்லாமல் எளிமையாக, நேர்மையாக நடந்தது. இந்தத் தேர்தல் வெற்றி என்பது, நேபாள மக்களின் அமைதிக்குக் கிடைத்த வெற்றி!”
”ஆயுதங்களைத் தூக்கிப் போட்டுவிட்டு ஜனநாயகத்துக்குத் திரும்பியிருக்கும் மாவோயிஸ்ட்கள், இதே நிலையைத் தொடர்வார்களா?”
”செப்டம்பர் 11 சம்பவத்துக்குப் பிறகு, ஆயுதம் தாங்கிய போராட்டக் குழுக்கள் அனைத்தையும் தீவிரவாத அமைப்புகளாக அறிவித்தது அமெரிக்கா. இதனால், விடுதலைப் புலிகள் உள்பட பல போராட்டக் குழுக்கள் அந்தந்த நாடுகளுடன் அமைதிப் பேச்சுவார்த்தையில் ஈடுபட்டன. பெரும்பாலும் அவை தோல்வியிலேயே முடிந்தன. நேபாள மாவோயிஸ்ட்கள் மட்டுமே இந்த வாய்ப்பைச் சரியாகப் பயன்படுத்திக்கொண்டார்கள். நேபாள மாவோயிஸ்ட் கட்சியின் தலைவர் பிரசண்டவிடம், ‘ஜனநாயகப் பாதையில் நீடிப்பீர்களா?’ என்று கேட்டோம். ”ஆயுதம் வைத்துக்கொள்ள வேண்டிய நிர்பந்தத்தில்தான் ஆயுதம் தூக்கினோம். இனி, அது தேவைப்படாது. ஆயுதம் ஏந்திய போராட்டங்களில் ஈடுபட்டிருக்கும் மூன்றாவது உலக நாடுகளைச் சேர்ந்த அமைப்புகளுக்கு நாங்கள் முன்னுதாரணமாக இருப்போம்” என்றார்.”
”நேபாளத்தில் ஜனநாயகம் மலர்ந்திருப்பதை இந்தியா எப்படிப் பார்க்கிறது?”
”ஒருவகையில் இது இந்தியாவுக்குக் கிடைத்த அடிதான். மாவோயிஸ்ட்கள் தலைமையில் ஆட்சி அமைவதை ஒருவித படபடப்புடன்தான் பார்க்கிறது இந்தியா. நேபாளத்தில் செல்வாக்கான கட்சியான மாதேஸி கட்சி, ஆரம்பத்தில் இந்தத் தேர்தலில் பங்கேற்க மறுத்து வந்தது. இதன் பின்னணியில் இந்திய உளவுத் துறை இருப்பதாகச் சொல்கிறார்கள். அரண்மனையிலிருந்து வெளியேறப்போகும் நேபாள மன்னரை இந்தியாவில் தங்கவைக்க இந்திய அரசு விரும்புவதாகச் சொல்கிறார்கள். அதை மாவோயிஸ்ட்கள் விரும்பவில்லை. இதுவரை சீனா வெளிப்படையாக ஆதரவு தெரிவிக்கவில்லை என்றாலும், அது மாவோயிஸ்ட்களுக்கு ஆதரவாகவே இருக்கும் என்கிறார்கள். இந்தியா என்ன செய்யப்போகிறது என்று பார்க்கலாம்!”
”நேபாள மாவோயிஸ்ட்களின் இந்த வெற்றி, மற்ற ஆயுதப் போராட்ட அமைப்புகளுக்கு வழிகாட்டுமா?”
”நிச்சயமாக! 1983லிருந்து ஆயுதப் போராட்டத்தில் ஈடுபட்டிருக்கும் புலிகளால் இதுவரை அமைதியை எட்ட முடியவில்லை. காரணம், மாவோயிஸ்ட்களைப் போல நடைமுறை சார்ந்த அணுகுமுறை புலிகளிடம் இல்லை. விடுதலைப்புலிகள் இந்த முன்னுதாரணத்தைப் பரிசீலிக்கச் செய்ய வேண்டிய நேரம் இது
இலங்கை தமிழர் பிரச்சினையில் நாம் இப்போது செய்ய வேண்டியதெல்லாம் உணர்ச்சி வசப்படுவதை விட்டுவிட்டு அடுத்த நகர்வு குறித்து யோசிப்பதுதான். இன்னும் பல தசாப்தங்களுக்கு போரை நடத்திக்கொண்டிருப்பதா? போர் முடிவுக்கு வரும்பட்சத்தில் தமிழர், இலங்கையில் நிலையான அமைதியோடு வாழ வழிவகை என்ன? நம்முன் இருக்கும் கேள்விகள்…
நேபாளத்தில் ஜனநாயகத்தை ஏற்படுத்தி ஆயுத ஏந்திய மாவோயிஸ்டுகளின் அணுகுமுறையை இலங்கை பிரச்சினையில் புலிகள் ஏன் ஆராய்ந்து பார்க்கக்கூடாது? நேபாளத்தில் மன்னராட்சியும் நிலப்பிரபுத்துவமும் பிரச்சினைகள் என்றால் இலங்கையில் இருப்பது இனப்பிரச்சினை என்று மேலோட்டமாகப்பார்த்து தள்ளிவைக்காமல் இது குறித்து சிந்தனையும் விவாதமும் செய்ய வேண்டியிருக்கிறது. கடந்த ஆண்டு நேபாள அரசியல் நிர்ணநய சபைக்கான தேர்தலுக்குப் பார்வையாளராக சென்று வந்திருந்த புதுவை சுகுமாறனிடம் நான் கண்ட நேர்காணலின் சுருக்கப்பட்ட வடிவம் இது. நான் பணியாற்றிய வார இதழில் வெளியானது . சூழ்நிலை கருதி மீள்பிரசுரம் செய்கிறேன்.
மக்கள் ஆட்சியா, மன்னர் ஆட்சியா என்று புயல் வீசிக்கொண்டு இருந்த நேபாளத்தில் இப்போது ஜனநாயகக் காற்று! பத்தாண்டுகளாக நடந்த ஆயுதப் போராட்டத்தின் முடிவில், மாவோயிஸ்ட்கள் தலைமையிலான ஆட்சி அமைந்திருக்கிறது. நேபாள அரசியல் நிர்ணய சபைத் தேர்தலின் பார்வையாளராகச் சென்று வந்த மனித உரிமை ஆர்வலர் புதுவை கோ.சுகுமாறனுடன் ஒரு சந்திப்பு…
”ஆயுதம் தாங்கிய போராட்ட அமைப்பான மாவோயிஸ்ட்கள் நேபாளத் தேர்தலில் வெற்றி பெற்றிருக்கிறார்கள். எப்படி இது சாத்தியமாயிற்று?”
”நேபாள மக்களின் ஒரே வருமானம் சுற்றுலாதான். காட்மாண்டு நகரம், இரண்டு மலைகளுக்கு நடுவே கோடையிலும் கொப்பளிக்கும் நாராயணி ஆறு. இந்த இரண்டும் கொள்ளை அழகுடையவை. இருந்தாலும், ஏழ்மையும் வறுமையும்தான் நேபாளத்தின் உண்மையான முகம். விவசாயம் நொடித் துப்போன பல லட்சம் பேர் கூர்க்காக்களாக, இந்தியாவுக்கும் கொரியாவுக்கும் கிளம்பிவிடுகிறார்கள். கடந்த 240 ஆண்டுகளாக மன்னரைக் கடவுளாக நினைத்து, அவர் தங்களுக்கு நல்லது செய்வார் என்று நம்பிக்கொண்டு இருந்தவர்கள் நேபாள மக்கள். 1996ல் மன்னர் குடும்பத்துக்குள்ளேயே நடந்த படுகொலைகள் அந்த நம்பிக்கையை முதன்முறையாகத் தகர்த்தன. அதன் பிறகுதான் கட்சிகளின் மேல் மக்கள் நம்பிக்கை வைக்கத் தொடங்கினார்கள். மன்னராட்சிக்கு எதிரான போராட்டத்தை முன்னெடுத்துச் சென்றார்கள் மாவோயிஸ்ட்கள். கடந்த பத்தாண்டுகளாக நடந்த போராட்டத்தில் இரண்டு தரப்பிலும் சேர்த்து 12 ஆயிரம் பேர் உயிர் இழந்திருக்கிறார்கள். இரண்டு முறை தள்ளி வைக்கப்பட்டு, மூன்றாவது முறையாக அரசியல் நிர்ணய சபைக்கான தேர்தல் இப்போது நடந்தது. மாவோயிஸ்ட்கள் இதில் பெரும்பான்மையான இடங்களைப் பிடித்து வென்றதற்கு அரசியல்ரீதியாக நிறைய காரணங்கள் இருந்தாலும் அடித்தட்டு மக்களை ஒன்றிணைத்ததுதான் முக்கியமான காரணம்! தேர்தல் மிக அமைதியாக நடந்தது. கிட்டத்தட்ட 85 சதவிகித ஓட்டுப்பதிவு நடந்தது. ரொம்பவும் சாதாரணமாக மரத்தடியில் ஓட்டுப் பெட்டியை வைத்திருந்தார்கள். ஓட்டு எண்ணுவதும்கூட அதீத பாதுகாப்பு இல்லாமல் எளிமையாக, நேர்மையாக நடந்தது. இந்தத் தேர்தல் வெற்றி என்பது, நேபாள மக்களின் அமைதிக்குக் கிடைத்த வெற்றி!”
”ஆயுதங்களைத் தூக்கிப் போட்டுவிட்டு ஜனநாயகத்துக்குத் திரும்பியிருக்கும் மாவோயிஸ்ட்கள், இதே நிலையைத் தொடர்வார்களா?”
”செப்டம்பர் 11 சம்பவத்துக்குப் பிறகு, ஆயுதம் தாங்கிய போராட்டக் குழுக்கள் அனைத்தையும் தீவிரவாத அமைப்புகளாக அறிவித்தது அமெரிக்கா. இதனால், விடுதலைப் புலிகள் உள்பட பல போராட்டக் குழுக்கள் அந்தந்த நாடுகளுடன் அமைதிப் பேச்சுவார்த்தையில் ஈடுபட்டன. பெரும்பாலும் அவை தோல்வியிலேயே முடிந்தன. நேபாள மாவோயிஸ்ட்கள் மட்டுமே இந்த வாய்ப்பைச் சரியாகப் பயன்படுத்திக்கொண்டார்கள். நேபாள மாவோயிஸ்ட் கட்சியின் தலைவர் பிரசண்டவிடம், ‘ஜனநாயகப் பாதையில் நீடிப்பீர்களா?’ என்று கேட்டோம். ”ஆயுதம் வைத்துக்கொள்ள வேண்டிய நிர்பந்தத்தில்தான் ஆயுதம் தூக்கினோம். இனி, அது தேவைப்படாது. ஆயுதம் ஏந்திய போராட்டங்களில் ஈடுபட்டிருக்கும் மூன்றாவது உலக நாடுகளைச் சேர்ந்த அமைப்புகளுக்கு நாங்கள் முன்னுதாரணமாக இருப்போம்” என்றார்.”
”நேபாளத்தில் ஜனநாயகம் மலர்ந்திருப்பதை இந்தியா எப்படிப் பார்க்கிறது?”
”ஒருவகையில் இது இந்தியாவுக்குக் கிடைத்த அடிதான். மாவோயிஸ்ட்கள் தலைமையில் ஆட்சி அமைவதை ஒருவித படபடப்புடன்தான் பார்க்கிறது இந்தியா. நேபாளத்தில் செல்வாக்கான கட்சியான மாதேஸி கட்சி, ஆரம்பத்தில் இந்தத் தேர்தலில் பங்கேற்க மறுத்து வந்தது. இதன் பின்னணியில் இந்திய உளவுத் துறை இருப்பதாகச் சொல்கிறார்கள். அரண்மனையிலிருந்து வெளியேறப்போகும் நேபாள மன்னரை இந்தியாவில் தங்கவைக்க இந்திய அரசு விரும்புவதாகச் சொல்கிறார்கள். அதை மாவோயிஸ்ட்கள் விரும்பவில்லை. இதுவரை சீனா வெளிப்படையாக ஆதரவு தெரிவிக்கவில்லை என்றாலும், அது மாவோயிஸ்ட்களுக்கு ஆதரவாகவே இருக்கும் என்கிறார்கள். இந்தியா என்ன செய்யப்போகிறது என்று பார்க்கலாம்!”
”நேபாள மாவோயிஸ்ட்களின் இந்த வெற்றி, மற்ற ஆயுதப் போராட்ட அமைப்புகளுக்கு வழிகாட்டுமா?”
”நிச்சயமாக! 1983லிருந்து ஆயுதப் போராட்டத்தில் ஈடுபட்டிருக்கும் புலிகளால் இதுவரை அமைதியை எட்ட முடியவில்லை. காரணம், மாவோயிஸ்ட்களைப் போல நடைமுறை சார்ந்த அணுகுமுறை புலிகளிடம் இல்லை. விடுதலைப்புலிகள் இந்த முன்னுதாரணத்தைப் பரிசீலிக்கச் செய்ய வேண்டிய நேரம் இது
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
