100 Degrees In J&K

Inder Malhotra

Aug 04th, 2010 

THE FIRST thing to be said about Jammu and Kashmir chief minister Omar Abdullah’s meeting with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and other members of the Union Cabinet’s Committee on Security is that it should have come much earlier. For more than five weeks the Valley has been in the grip of a vicious cycle of violence, with stone-pelting mobs and firings by security forces inevitably leading to deaths of civilians, including teenagers.

Even more virulent protests, almost always in utter defiance of curfew, then follow. This is too long a period for which to delay crucial consultations between the Centre and the sensitive state. All through it one witnessed only inaction in Srinagar and silence in New Delhi.

Secondly, Mr Abdullah, who has the Union government’s full support even while being reminded of his responsibility to control the ground situation, is entirely right in saying that Kashmir is essentially a political problem that should be tackled politically. He has also rightly added that no political initiative can be taken until the mindless violence ends and there is “a semblance of normalcy”.

That is the obvious first step. Alas, that is where the rub seems to lie. For despite his impassioned appeal to the civil society of Kashmir to cooperate with the government in restoring peace and calm from his press conference in Delhi, the situation in the Valley has worsened rather than show any sign of abating.

It is noteworthy that until four or five days ago the protesters in Kashmir towns, including Srinagar, used to confine their violence to stone throwing and thrashing security personnel falling into their hands. Since then their activity has taken an alarming turn. They, including rather large number of women, have taken to setting ablaze police stations, railway stations, police vehicles, even ambulances, indeed, every symbol of state authority. This reprehensible pattern persists after the Delhi discussions. Kashmir is no longer on the boil; it is burning.

Mr Abdullah’s third point is that the motley mobs wreaking havoc on Kashmir streets are “leaderless”. He is right inasmuch as there is no discernable line of command in the current agitation. But it is also true that Syed Ali Shah Geelani, leader of the hardline faction of Hurriyat, and some of his cohorts (one of them in hiding) regularly issue “protest calendars”. Not only students and private citizens but also state government employees obey these, the latter neglecting their duties with impunity. Yet there is danger that the situation might spin out of even their hands.

Under the circumstances, political leaders of the state who do not share the nefarious agenda of the separatists must establish contact with the locality elders and people in general. But what is the actual position? Over the weekend, rather belatedly, Mr Abdullah formed three ministerial groups for this purpose and these teams have since visited three of the major trouble spots in the Valley. But, in this respect, shouldn’t the chief minister have taken the lead himself? Leaders of other political parties should also be doing the same, but that is far from being the case.

One can sympathise with Mr Abdullah about his difficulties vis-à-vis the main Opposition party, the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), led by the strident Mehbooba Mufti whose relationship with him is one of implacable hatred. The country witnessed that, despite a personal appeal by the Prime Minister, she refused to attend an all-party meeting called by the chief minister to evolve a consensus on dealing with the grim challenge facing the state. But what about senior leaders of the ruling party, the National Conference, founded by the chief minister’s grandfather, the incomparable Sheikh Mohammed Abdullah, or, for that matter, the Congress Party, the NC’s partner in the ruling coalition? Sadly, the state of affairs could not have been more regrettable than it is.

There is a virtual chasm between Mr Abdullah and his senior party colleagues who are not ministers. Their complaint is that he ignores them. Obviously, the party’s and indeed the country’s collective interest is of no concern to them. As for the J&K Congress, it is a house divided against itself. Rival factions are busy fighting each other, and have no time to confront the enemies of Kashmir’s peace and stability. Ms Mufti was not the only state leader to absent herself from the chief minister’s all-party conference. Another conspicuous absentee was Tara Chand, deputy chief minister belonging to the Congress! Has anyone in the party’s national leadership called him to account?

It is also curious that all the blame for civilian deaths is being heaped on the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), and at one remove, on the Central government. The constitutional position is that the CRPF has no authority to act anywhere on its own. It does so only in aid of civil authority and thus under the orders of the state government. Moreover, why doesn’t the Kashmir government deploy more Kashmiri police that includes 63,000-strong armed constabulary, instead of calling the Border Security Force at the drop of a Karakuli cap? Of course, the forces are stretched because of the Amarnath yatra which explains the Centre’s prompt willingness to send more CRPF battalions to J&K.

What is required is that the reinforcements should consist of those who are better trained and better led.

Another strange facet of the situation is that the Accountability Committee of the state, which served a useful purpose because people with grievances could approach it for redress, no longer exists. Not because it has been abolished but simply because, under the law, its members have to be chosen jointly by the chief minister and the leader of the Opposition, Ms Mufti. The twain cannot agree even on the time of the day.

The present challenge in Kashmir is graver than that at the time of the Holy Relic Crisis in December 1963-January 1964, when the whole Valley seemed to hang by a thread. Jawaharlal Nehru, though ailing, immediately sent his trusted troubleshooter, Lal Bahadur Shastri, to Srinagar with instructions to stay there until the crisis was resolved. How radically the times have changed since then!

Source : http://www.asianage.com/opinion/100-degrees-jk-976

News From Bangladesh - July 28

Behind the Niqab Bill -- France’s Religious Intolerance

By Dr. Habib Siddiqui

There was a time in my life when France loomed big in my radar screen of the countries that I needed to visit. In my teenage years, I occasionally met French tourists, mostly college going students. Most of them spoke very little English. And yet that language barrier did not hinder these young French tourists from visiting the new independent state of Bangladesh. They appeared inquisitive and fun-loving. 

Years later when I came for my graduate studies in North America, I had few classmates that had come from France. They were good students, not the kind you see amongst today’s French politicians. At the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, one of the externals for my Ph.D. dissertation committee was a French professor who taught instability phenomena in the aerospace engineering department. He was a brilliant man who later returned to France to care for his ailing mother. I also met many French-speaking North African students who had a love-hate relationship with everything French. While they were bitter about their colonial experience, I could see their eyes shine every time they had the opportunity to speak in French, especially with someone from France or the province of Quebec in Canada. While some of us made fun of such unmistakable mood changes amongst our French-speaking friends, which we viewed as a flaw, they would remind us that ‘civilized people speak French and not English.’ There was definitely that nostalgia about being ‘civilized’, in spite of the memories of a bitter past that their parents had to endure against the French colonizers! 

While the French Republic gave us the notions of liberty, equality and fraternity, the non-European natives – the colonized people – were never included in that formula. They were for conquer, colonization and carnage. And the French colonizers were a tough bunch -- ruthless killers, criminals and marauders -- who fought tooth and nail before ceasing their control of the former colonies. 

In the 19th and 20th centuries, the colonial empire of France was the second largest in the world behind the British Empire. Its influence made French the fourth-most spoken colonial European language, behind English, Spanish, and Portuguese. The French rule of Algeria lasted from 1830 to 1962. Algeria became a destination for hundreds of thousands of European immigrants, known as colons and later, as pieds-noirs (meaning “Black-Foot”). These colonists accounted for ten percent of the population in Algeria, before the country achieved its independence in 1962. In Algeria, the native Muslims were not considered French and did not share the same political or economic benefits as those enjoyed by the pieds-noirs. Politically, the Muslim Algerians had no representation in the Algerian National Assembly and wielded limited influence in local governance. To obtain citizenship, they were required to renounce their Muslim identity, a bigotry-ridden litmus test, whose ramification in terms of certain Muslim-related legislative measures cannot be overlooked or ignored in today’s so-called secular France. Since this renouncement would constitute apostasy, only about 2,500 Algerian Muslims acquired citizenship before 1930. 

Following a French Justice Ministry decree, décret Crémieux, in 1870, all Sephardic Jews -- who had settled in Algeria (and Tunisia and Morocco) after the Spanish Inquisition as a welcome gesture from the Ottoman Empire -- quickly became French citizens and came to be regarded by the natives as the pieds-noirs.

Like in other former colonies, the nationalists in Algeria wanted equality, if not liberty, which were denied to them. During a reform effort in 1947, the French government created a bicameral legislature with one house for the Pieds-Noirs and another for the Algerians but made a European’s vote equal seven times a native’s vote. In response, Algerian paramilitary groups such as the Front de Libération Nationale (FLN) appeared which demanded independence from the French rule. This led to the outbreak of a war for independence, the Algerian War, in 1954, in which over the next eight years more than a million Algerians were killed by the colonists and the French government. 

After General Charles de Gaulle assumed leadership in France in 1958, he attempted peace by visiting Algeria within days of his appointment and by organizing a referendum on January 8, 1961 for Algerian self-determination. The referendum, organized in metropolitan France, passed overwhelmingly. Pieds-noirs viewed this referendum as betrayal and formed the Organisation de l'armée secrète (OAS) and began attacking institutions representing the French state, Algerians, and de Gaulle himself. They terrorized and tortured the Muslim population of Algeria and bombed places of worship, business, schools and housing. The bloodshed culminated in 1961 during a failed Algiers putsch that was led by retired generals to topple de Gaulle. After this failure, on March 18, 1962 de Gaulle and the FLN signed a cease-fire agreement, the Évian Accords, and held a referendum. In June 1962 the French electorate approved the Evian Accords by an overwhelming 91 percent vote. On July 1, 1962, Algerians voted 5,992,115 to 16,534 to become independent from France. De Gaulle pronounced Algeria an independent country on July 3.

As noted earlier, Algerian independence had been bitterly opposed by the pieds-noirs and many members of the French military, and the anti-independence OAS. A "scorched earth" policy was declared by the OAS to deny French-built development to the future FLN government. This policy climaxed June 7, 1962 as the OAS Delta Commando burned Algiers’ Library, with its 60,000 volumes, and blew up Oran’s town hall, the municipal library, and four schools. In addition the OAS was pursuing a terror-bombing campaign that in May 1962 was killing an estimated 10 to 15 people in Oran daily.

The Evian Accords stipulated that Algerians would be permitted to continue freely circulating between their country and France for work, although they would not have equal political rights to French citizens. It is no surprise that many of the Muslim migrants to France are from Algeria. 

After independence of Algeria, many Pieds-Noirs settled in France, while others migrated to New Caledonia, Italy, Spain, Australia, North America, Israel, and South America. As hard-core racists, many of them remain hostile to Muslim migrants in France and elsewhere.

The post-9/11 xenophobia against Muslims in France owes a great deal to racist and bigoted elements within the French society that have not come to terms with their losses in Algeria. They see the Muslims as aliens and unwanted, and would like nothing better than a litmus test, much like the failed attempt in colonial Algeria more than a century ago. To them, the French Muslims must prove their adherence to the French way of life by renouncing their Muslim identity. Interestingly, President Nicolas Sarkozy, a crypto-Jew with roots in Ottoman-ruled Salonika, is at the head of such a xenophobic campaign against Muslims in Europe. 

Last week, on July 13 the French lower house of parliament approved a bill banning wearing garments such as the niqab or burqa, which incorporate a full-face veil (with eyes open), anywhere in public. It envisages fines of 150 euros for women who break the law and 30,000 euros and a one-year jail term for men who force their wives to wear the burqa. While the bill is showcased as a touchstone for the Sarkozy administration’s policy of integration, most Muslim women do not fit the stereotype of marginalized, oppressed women. Many of the 2000 niqab-wearers in France are new converts to Islam. They wear it as a choice, as a sign of their modesty, and not out of forced compulsion from anyone. The French bill is opposed to religious freedom and is highly discriminatory. It proscribes what to wear and what not to wear on the streets. 

In a BBC interview, a French Muslim woman said, “Liberty means freedom of conscience, of expression.” Would Sarkozy and his justice minister, Michèle Alliot-Marie, who said on the eve of Bastille Day that the vote was a “success” for the Republic, ever have the moral courage to listen to those French Muslims -- why they wear it? Can these French legislators, the closet bigots -- I must point out, answer the following questions: what is it about the invisibility of a woman’s face that is so challenging to French identity? What is so important about the niqab that gives the state the right to intervene? As the Guardian editorial wisely noted, “Users of the metro or underground learn instinctively to avoid looking each other in the eye. It is regarded as an intrusion. And yet no state legislature would think about passing a law that bans the wearing of sunglasses indoors on the grounds that it poses a threat to national security. So what is it about the niqab, worn by so few, that threatens so many? And what values, exactly, are being protected?” (July 15)

The French bill banning niqab and burqa has only shown how weak the French society is. It is rotting from within like Holland and Belgium. Rather than fixing its inner weaknesses, it is trying to pass a law that would terrorize a small minority that proudly dons burqa or niqab as their personal choice. France talks about secularism, religious freedom and liberty but the essence of such messages has never penetrated its soul. Sarkozy and his gang of secular fundamentalists ought to know that they can never expect to be respected for upholding flawed values that promote bigotry, instead of pluralism or multi-culture in a world that is increasingly becoming diverse.

E Mail : saeva@aol.com

Source : http://newsfrombangladesh.net/view.php?hidDate=2010-08-02&hidType=EDT

The News - August 1

DEATH by TAXES

By Shahir Hussain

It took a two page report and a video on their website by the New York Times to demonstrate to many young people the abysmal state of tax collection in Pakistan. Social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook were awash with outraged tweets and posts of the article which described how only 2.5 million people in Pakistan pay income taxes whereas there should be at least 10 million registered tax payers.
 
This is nothing new. Tax evasion is a game which is played in the highest echelons of power and emulated all the way down the power tree. Pakistan has one of the most regressive taxation systems in the world where the poor pay for the dishonesty of the rich via indirect taxes like the General Sales Tax (GST), levies on utility bills, petrol, medicines, and anything that they need to scrape out an existence. The rich keep buying their luxury vehicles and living in palatial homes which nobody will ever question. Most politicians’ income declarations enable them to apply for the Benazir Income Support Fund yet they drive cars worth millions of rupees.
 
Tax evasion didn’t just arrive in Pakistan as a sport, we wrote the manual for it decades ago. But in October or even earlier things are going to get worse. The World Bank and the IMF have decided that it’s not funny anymore and if the government of Pakistan wants to borrow billions of dollars then it better start collecting more taxes. The political will to tax agriculture just doesn’t exist so we’re going to get hit by the Value Added Tax (VAT) or a modified GST which will again increase the burden of taxation on the poor people of Pakistan and the middle class. Incidentally these aren’t the people who are buying four wheelers yet they’re the ones the super GST is going to shaft the most.
 
Recently, I was present during a conversation between a non-resident Pakistani (NRP) and a friend who has worked at the IMF for a decade. The NRP was talking about using fool-proof technology to incentivize people to pay their taxes like his new home while the IMF-wala was trying to explain to him (rather unsuccessfully) that all the laws and systems in the world existed in Pakistan yet when it came to political and bureaucratic will we failed. He recounted a meeting with the former finance minister where the minister was talking about reforming the taxation and collection system — his observation was that the bureaucrats in the ministers’ team were smirking visibly as if to say “let him talk, he’ll be gone soon and we’ll be here for decades”. The said minister resigned soon after.
 
So what look like simple solutions to people with a few brain cells turn into complex collider experiments once they enter the machinations of the government of Pakistan. Everyone wants to know one thing and one thing alone, “What’s in it for me and mine?” This was not the public service our grandparents had in mind when the arrived in Pakistan sixty odd years ago. But the truth is that Pakistan is a large cow and there are parasites which have attached themselves to it for decades and there’s no one who’s going to pick the ticks off. There’s a reason why such few Pakistani businesses have succeeded like their Indian cousins internationally. The lack of political and bureaucratic support just doesn’t exist for them to succeed the way they have managed in Pakistan. Essentially we are a rent seeking economy where the seths have gotten a flavor for easy money without really feeling the need to pay taxes. The property business is a case in point with the fabled “file”. Say a commercial plot in Defence Karachi costs 1 crore PKR and an investor buys it.


The file will show the value of the file as 5 lacs PKR instead of 1 crore. Everyone knows this happens yet the FBR and the CBR can’t do anything about it because our political and bureaucratic leaders don’t allow it.
 
In India something very similar used to happen, until the Indian government announced that it would buy any property at the value stated on the file and pay a 25 per cent premium to the owner. Within months the files started to reflect the real value of the property and there was a massive increase in revenues for the taxation authorities. There are thousands of creative ways to plug the gaps without passing on the burden of taxation to the poor in the form of indirect taxes. Unfortunately all of them require the essence of public service to come back to the folks in Islamabad instead of being concerned about stuffing their pockets.
 
An interesting piece of research released recently demonstrates that the assets of our legislators double within two years of getting elected – and this is not a trend started by this particular Government, it’s something which happens with every government once it’s elected. October is around the corner and unless we can get our house in order and fast, there are going to be crushing indirect taxes which will be imposed on the masses and the middle classes. Buying SUVs requires money and the international community has decided that they’re not going to pay for them anymore.

The writer lives in Karachi. Email: shakir.thenews@gmail .com

Source : http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=254132

The Asian Age - July 23

There’s No Excuse For Such Behaviour

Even as we can understand that actions of ordained political actors will be guided by the urge to derive the maximum perceived advantage months before a major election, it is hard to see how the shenanigans of Opposition legislators in Bihar can be justified on any count. The wholly blameworthy acts of disruption and violence indulged in by the Opposition parties in the state Assembly on Wednesday can hardly be said to inaugurate a soiled chapter. In recent years unacceptable behaviour of the same type has been witnessed in several state legislatures. Indeed, the way MPs — who could have set an example — have conducted themselves in the Lok Sabha in recent years can hardly be deemed worthy of emulation. Even so, it is no exaggeration to suggest that Bihar’s legislators have shown the way to a new low in unbecoming conduct by public servants — all in the name of safeguarding the values enshrined in the idea of representative government of course. Before long, in order to shame our legislators, a public-spirited body that cares for democracy might see it fit to invite MLAs and MPs to a tongue-lashing by those who elect them. Or are we expecting too much from those we vote in, considering that a fair proportion — across the political spectrum — have serious criminal cases instituted against them?

The Comptroller and Auditor-General of India has indicted the Bihar government of malfeasance to the tune of several thousand crores of rupees in the last seven years. The matter is out in the open with the Patna high court ordering a CBI probe following a public interest litigation case. In the event, any Opposition worth its timbre would be up in arms. However, this gives the parties outside the government no licence to smash furniture and seek to hurl missiles at the Speaker. It is debatable whether the Speaker should have suspended the entire Opposition for the remainder of the Assembly’s term, set to expire in four months, or if he should have asked the marshals to bundle out the MLAs forcefully. But there is no question that the Opposition parties behaved without a modicum of dignity even when they were within their rights to lodge their protest emphatically. The ruling side too has taken a needlessly confrontationist stand in relation to the judiciary. The Speaker has held that the high court was out of order in ordering a CBI probe before the Assembly had disposed of the matter. This appears an extreme view. The judiciary is an independent branch of the government and is not obliged to take its cue from the legislature. Besides, in this case the high court gave its order in the context of a PIL. The Nitish Kumar-led NDA government has appealed to the court to stay its order directing a CBI probe. It might have been a lot better if the chief minister had himself decided to ask for a CBI inquiry. The Opposition has demanded the resignations of the chief minister and his deputy so that they may not influence the proposed investigation. Since state elections are due in four months, the chief minister may consider exercising his prerogative to dissolve the House.

Source : http://www.asianage.com/editorial/there’s-no-excuse-such-behaviour-682

The Jerusalem Post - July 28

Waging war morally

The ravages of the Afghanistan war were displayed for all to see. Tens of thousands of documents, most of them descriptions made by lower-ranking servicemen of specific incidents that took place between January 2004 and December 2009, detailed the day-today realities confronted by the coalition forces in Afghanistan.

There was the duplicity of Pakistan, suspected of receiving aid from the US and other coalition countries, while at the same time providing Taliban forces with vital support. There was the widespread corruption of Afghanistan’s officials and police, which prevented funds earmarked for orphanages, hospitals and other humanitarian needs from reaching their destination.

But what received the most Israeli media coverage – because of the pertinence to Israel’s battles against Hamas and Hizbullah – were the extensive reports of civilian deaths caused by coalition forces.

Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks, who this week made public the 91,000 secret, sensitiveUS military documents on the war in Afghanistan, said at a press conference on Sunday, “It is up to a court to decide clearly whether something is, in the end, a crime. That said, on the face of it, there does appear to be evidence of war crimes in this material.”

Assange did not seem too concerned about the possible criminality of his own decision to leak documents that could endanger coalition forces operating in Afghanistan.

WERE JUDGE Richard Goldstone to look into the incidents of civilian deaths detailed in the paperwork, he would probably agree with Assange. Judging from Goldstone’s verdict on Israel during Operation Cast Lead, as detailed in his UN report, he would all but ignore the Taliban’s use of Afghanistan’s civilians as human shields, while incriminating the US, Britain and the other coalition forces for perpetrating war crimes such as disproportionate collateral damage.

In fact, applying Goldstone’s ethical standards would effectively rule out the possibility of warfare of any kind against foes like the Taliban.

“When you send a lot of soldiers to a place like Afghanistan inevitably there will be some civilian casualties,” Prof. Asa Kasher, an internationally renowned expert on military ethics and author of the IDF’s moral code, noted in response to the Wikileaks material. In other words, it is impossible to launch a war against the Taliban in Afghanistan, or for that matter, against Hamas in Gaza, without committing what Goldstone and other human rights activists would consider to be “war crimes.”

According to Kasher, Israel’s rules of engagement are utterly ethical and essentially the same as those of all other western countries, including the US, Britain, Germany, France, Italy and other coalition countries fighting in Afghanistan. Professionalism, another important factor in maintaining a high ethical standard, is also equivalent.

So if Israel’s actions in Gaza were judged to be illegal, so would the coalition’s in Afghanistan.

THE IMPLICATIONS of Goldstone’s thinking are farreaching – and not just for Israel – as the leaked documents underline.

Were his parameters accepted, they would mean that Israel, unable to engage in warfare with Hamas without causing civilian casualties, would have to refrain from defending itself altogether. Instead, it would have to rely on diplomacy with an organization that refuses to recognize the right of Israel to exist. Doing nothing to protect residents of Sderot and other settlements near Gaza from the constant barrage of Kassam missiles is, apparently, not immoral.

Meanwhile, the US, Britain and the other coalition forces would have to give up their war against the Taliban and Al-Qaida, launched after 9/11. Religious extremism would be free to run rampant, murderously settling scores against those who cooperated with the coalition forces in the hope of ushering in a freer society – women who removed the burqa, politicians who pushed for democracy and freedom, and educators who hoped to supplement the Koran with math, science and literature.

But morality does not demand submission to terrorists and violent religious extremists. Terrible things happen in war, including the unavoidable deaths of civilians.

But refraining from waging war against evil, or defending what is good, is a betrayal of the human obligation to champion freedom.

That would be truly immoral.

Source :  http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Editorials/Article.aspx?id=182929

The Asian Age - July 31

Cameron, In India, Sends Right Signals

The empire has faded. In the decades since Indian independence and decolonisation, Britain has leaned across the Atlantic toward the United States in search of economic and political consolidation. In more recent times, with the emergence of the European Union, the British inclination has been to combine its American relationship with solicitousness for Europe. However, with even the powerful European economies as well as the US recording at best moderate growth rates over the years, it has been natural for London to pay more attention to India which not so long ago was viewed as “an exotic basket case”. But that was then. With the recent near collapse of the international financial system, and the Indian economy still making a stab at a nine per cent rate of growth, there was little question that Prime Minister David Cameron would seek to lay the “foundations for an enhanced relationship” with this country, to use his words before he began his three-day India visit earlier this week.

The British leader’s visit has been a huge publicity success, with Mr Cameron making the right social and political pitch in both Bengaluru and New Delhi, not to mention his ability to be one of the boys wherever he went. He didn’t lecture. He didn’t go on village safaris. He just let people think he was being himself. That’s a quality people like in a leader. Perhaps the Prime Minister could conduct himself in the manner he did because he was able to facilitate the £700 million agreement between BAE-Rolls Royce and Hindustan Aeronautics to purchase 57 more Hawk trainer jets. This is a big boost to British manufacturing in bad times. But the importance of Mr Cameron’s visit will be judged by going beyond trade. His sharp criticism of Pakistan on the terrorism issue, and later statement that he stood by what he had said, would earn the new British leader bonus points in India. No Western leader has spoken with such frankness on the subject of Pakistan from Indian soil. The Americans have typically equivocated. The other Europeans are not as culturally and historically tuned to the subcontinent as Britain is. So, somewhere it matters, and what Mr Cameron had to say stung Islamabad into almost cancelling President Asif Ali Zardari’s proposed visit to London in early August. It is too early to say if British policy toward Pakistan is changing in any basic way, but many will hope London looks at Islamabad on merit. It has to make a considered judgment whether pandering to Pakistan would really be of help in containing or eliminating the prospects of future terrorist strikes in Britain.

On his three-day trip, Mr Cameron led a team of as many as six Cabinet ministers, including the foreign secretary, chancellor of the exchequer and business minister, besides top corporate executives and culture and art heavyweights. It is said there hasn’t been a larger British trade delegation “in living memory”, or a larger top-level delegation since the end of the Raj. The focus of the visit was clearly trade “and jobs”, as the British leader noted. If that’s the case — and Britain does need to recover from going from fourth to 18th place as the source of India’s imports — then Mr Cameron’s trip would carry greater meaning if he is able to attend to the key question of permitting Indian entrepreneurs, professionals and students from purposeful residence in Britain. Slashing non-EU immigration from next year would probably hurt deserving Indians more than people from any other country. Britain is pitching for trade in civil nuclear energy, banking, insurance and legal services. All of these will naturally have to be negotiated. But Mr Cameron has begun on a positive note.

Source : http://www.asianage.com/editorial/cameron-india-sends-right-signals-227

Jarusalem Post - July 25

Outlaws over lawmen

In Mizrahi’s case, perhaps Peres should step in.   “The law isn’t justice. It’s a very imperfect mechanism. If you press exactly the right buttons and are also lucky, justice may show up in the answer.” – Raymond Chandler

Anyone with even cursory familiarity with the legal system realizes that justice and fairness are by no means identical to legal strictures. What the law stipulates doesn’t necessarily mesh with what common sense dictates. A truly wise judiciary strives to bridge the gap between the average citizen’s intuition and legal instructions.

Our courts, however, sometimes seem bent on acquiring a reputation for supercilious insensitivity. An emotive case in point is the Supreme Court’s decision last Wednesday to double the prison time to which Hadera police detective Shahar Mizrahi was sentenced last September by the Central District Court.

Mizrahi had been sent down for 15 months, with another 15 months on probation, for the manslaughter shooting of car thief Mahmoud Ghanayem. Mizrahi apprehended Ghanayem in the act, was attacked with a screwdriver and pushed down. Immobilized by an injured ankle, Mizrahi said he shot at Ghanayem as he sped at him in the stolen vehicle, perhaps trying to run him over.

The lower court’s original sentence shocked the police and, claiming self-defense, Mizrahi appealed. So did the prosecution. To the police’s horror, not only was Mizrahi’s conviction upheld, but his jail-time was doubled. The court ruled that there was no significant evidence to back up Mizrahi’s account of what had unfolded.

Chief Justice Dorit Beinisch decreed that “the district court erred by giving more weight to Mizrahi’s personal circumstances and not enough to the value of the life that Mizrahi cut short. It also didn’t consider sufficiently the wider deterrent ramifications.”

Superficially, this may be reminiscent of the Shai Dromi case – in which the Negev rancher shot a Beduin rustler.

But Mizrahi was no vigilante taking the law into his own hands. Therefore, the deterrent of which Beinisch spoke appears aimed at law-enforcement personnel. “With little effort,” she averred, “Mizrahi could have avoided the danger he felt and shot at the car tires or the deceased’s legs.”

However, Judge Menahem Finkelstein, who presided over Mizrahi’s original trial, had argued that the incident evolved so rapidly, there was no time for careful evaluation, especially as the shooting occurred seconds after Ghanayem attacked the policeman with his screwdriver.

BEINISCH MAY have the dry language of the law on her side. The problem is in the application.

A court that doesn’t factor in extenuating circumstances is remiss. Yet here, second-guessing judges downplayed Mizrahi’s subjective sense of acute danger. Given the situation in which he was caught, as the district court judge evidently concluded, he had every rational reason to believe that his life was on the line.

For the Supreme Court to conclude otherwise required the justices to dismiss the instincts of a man on the ground facing an oncoming car – a man who was not operating in air-conditioned chambers, with hours to weigh pros and cons, calculate trajectories and mull over the thief’s legal standing.

When a ruling such as this one, even if it is in perfect accord with the letter of the law, violates the law’s spirit and egregiously offends ordinary folks’ notion of justice, it is – to put it mildly – counterproductive. In the popular perception, the highest court in our land preferred the rights of outlaws to the mission – indeed, the very lives – of lawmen.
In this regard, the case of another officer, Shlomi Asulin, is instructive. Four years ago, Asulin was stabbed with a screwdriver by a Beduin car thief he was attempting to apprehend in Rehovot. Asulin didn’t shoot. He has been in a vegetative state ever since. Indeed, Asulin’s condition was reported to have deteriorated on the very day the Supreme Court doubled Mizrahi’s jail time.

A society that seeks to maintain law and order must ask itself who will protect it if the courts refuse to consider the special combat-like circumstances under which officers sometimes must make split-second lifeand- death calls.

Policemen and -women are overworked and underpaid.

If they additionally feel thrown to the legal dogs, their motivation will be further undermined, and fewer yet will enlist in the service. The consequences for society collectively and each of us individually could be dire.

In Mizrahi’s case, perhaps President Shimon Peres might want to step into the breach.
Source : http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Editorials/Article.aspx?id=182479

Yahoo News - July 25

A Russian milestone: 

1st black elected to office

By KRISTINA NARIZHNAYA

NOVOZAVIDOVO, Russia – People in this Russian town used to stare at Jean Gregoire Sagbo because they had never seen a black man. Now they say they see in him something equally rare — an honest politician.
 

Sagbo last month became the first black to be elected to office in Russia.

In a country where racism is entrenched and often violent, Sagbo's election as one of Novozavidovo's 10 municipal councilors is a milestone. But among the town's 10,000 people, the 48-year-old from the West African country of Benin is viewed simply a Russian who cares about his hometown.

He promises to revive the impoverished, garbage-strewn town where he has lived for 21 years and raised a family. His plans include reducing rampant drug addiction, cleaning up a polluted lake and delivering heating to homes.

"Novozavidovo is dying," Sagbo said in an interview in the ramshackle municipal building. "This is my home, my town. We can't live like this."

"His skin is black but he is Russian inside," said Vyacheslav Arakelov, the mayor. "The way he cares about this place, only a Russian can care."

Sagbo isn't the first black in Russian politics. Another West African, Joaquin Crima of Guinea-Bissau, ran for head of a southern Russian district a year ago but was heavily defeated.

Crima was dubbed by the media "Russia's Obama." Now they've shifted the title to Sagbo, much to his annoyance.

"My name is not Obama. It's sensationalism," he said. "He is black and I am black, but it's a totally different situation."

Inspired by communist ideology, Sagbo came to Soviet Russia in 1982 to study economics in Moscow. There he met his wife, a Novozavidovo native. He moved to the town about 100 kilometers (65 miles) north of Moscow in 1989 to be close to his in-laws.

Today he is a father of two, and negotiates real estate sales for a Moscow conglomerate. His council job is unpaid.

Sagbo says neither he nor his wife wanted him to get into politics, viewing it as a dirty, dangerous business, but the town council and residents persuaded him to run for office.

They already knew him as a man of strong civic impulse. He had cleaned the entrance to his apartment building, planted flowers and spent his own money on street improvements. Ten years ago he organized volunteers and started what became an annual day of collecting garbage.

He said he feels no racism in the town. "I am one of them. I am home here," Sagbo said.

He felt that during his first year in the town, when his 4-year-old son Maxim came home in tears, saying a teenage boy spat at him. Sagbo ran outside in a rage, demanding that the spitter explain himself. Women sitting nearby also berated the teenager. Then the whole street joined in.

Russia's black population hasn't been officially counted but some studies estimate about 40,000 "Afro-Russians." Many are attracted by universities that are less costly than in the West. Scores of them suffer racially motivated attacks every year — 49 in Moscow alone in 2009, according to the Moscow Protestant Chaplaincy Task Force on Racial Violence and Harassment, an advocacy group.

After the Soviet Union collapsed, Novozavidovo's industries were rapidly privatized, leaving it in financial ruin. 

High unemployment, corruption, alcoholism and pollution blight what was once an idyllic town, just a short distance from the Zavidovo National Park, where Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and President Dmitry Medvedev take nature retreats. 

Denis Voronin, a 33-year-old engineer in Novozavidovo, said Sagbo was the town's first politician to get elected fairly, without resorting to buying votes

"Previous politicians were all criminals," he said. 

A former administration head — the equivalent of mayor in rural Russia — was shot to death by unknown assailants two years ago. 

The post is now held by Arakelov, a veteran of the Soviet war in Afghanistan who says he also wants to clean up corruption. He says money used to constantly disappear from the town budget and is being investigated by tax police. 

Residents say they pay providers for heat and hot water, but because of ineffective monitoring by the municipality they don't get much of either. The toilet in the municipal building is a room with a hole in the floor. 

As a councilor, Sagbo has already scored some successes. He mobilized residents to collect money and turn dilapidated lots between buildings into colorful playgrounds with new swings and painted fences. 

As he strolled around his neighborhood everyone greeted him and he responded in his fluent, French-African-accented Russian. Boys waved to Sagbo, who had promised them a soccer field. 

Sitting in the newly painted playground with her son, Irina Danilenko said it was the only improvement she has seen in the five years she has lived here.

"We don't care about his race," said Danilenko, 31. "We consider him one of us."

Source : http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100725/ap_on_re_eu/eu_russia_black_politician/print

The News - July 24

Cut in budget likely to force HEC to drop 80% of students

Saturday, July 24, 2010 Noor Aftab Islamabad A drastic cut in the annual budget is likely to force Higher Education Commission (HEC) to drop 80 per cent of students for foreign scholarships due to non-availability of required funds, sources told ‘The News’ here on Friday. The data showed that HEC set a target to select 800 students for foreign scholarships in MS, MPhil leading to PhD in universities of US, UK, Canada, Australia, Japan, Singapore, Germany, France and Cuba. The annual PSDP budget for the HEC has been reduced from Rs22.5 billion to Rs15.7 billion and now it is finding it difficult to provide required funds to 640 students for foreign scholarships. Sources said that the HEC has now approached top government functionaries for provision of funds otherwise it would have no option except to deprive hundreds of students of their foreign scholarships. An official said the scheme of foreign scholarships was initiated to supplement HEC’s efforts for provision of adequate number of trained PhD manpower that would ultimately help support technology upgrading, develop high standards of science and technology and meet growing challenges for national economy. He said that a number of scholarships are being offered to scholars to continue their postgraduate studies in the field of economics and finance abroad, adding that the scholarships provide awards for PhD scholarships to universities in leading European and Asian countries with low tuition fees. He said up to 10 per cent of the available seats are reserved to support the PhD level training of candidates, who have been admitted to a group of carefully selected universities in advanced countries based on their expertise in various disciplines. Sources said that currently there are over 9,000 students studying on various scholarships and human resource development programmes, including foreign PhD scholarships in various stages of their progress and an amount of Rs10 billion is required to maintain their monthly stipends, tuition fees and research expenses. The official said the allocated funds for the HEC would hardly enable them to meet expenses of those students already studying on scholarships so it would be difficult to provide more scholarships in the current year. It is pertinent to mention here that Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani assured vice chancellors of 70 public sector universities on February 23 that there would be no cut in financial allocations for the education sector, but unfortunately, the facts appeared contrary to his claim in the annual fiscal budget. HEC Member Operations and Planning Dr. Mukhtar Ahmad told this scribe that they have approached the government and hopefully required funds would be available for foreign scholarships of students. To a question whether they have got any assurance for provision of required funds, he said, “Hopefully we would be able to arrange funds for foreign scholarships.” HEC Executive Director Dr. Sohail Naqvi told this scribe, “Unfortunately we lack required funds for foreign scholarships, but we would try our level best to achieve the target of 800 foreign scholarships this year.” “We have approached the government, but so far it has given no assurance for provision of required funds. If funds are not available then we would have no other option, but to reduce number of foreign scholarships,” he said. To a question, he said, it is not yet clear how much funds would be available in the education sector under Kerry-Lugar Bill, adding, “We hope a portion of funds would also be given for higher education sector in the country.” Source :

http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=252532

The News - July 24

Resistance personified

Saturday, July 24, 2010 Farooq Sulehria Afghan leader Malalai Joya is resistance personified. She is the most vocal critic of both US occupation of Afghanistan and the ruling warlords. At the same time, she speaks dismissively of the Taliban: "Their violence is no resistance". However, Malalai Joya hardly grabs headlines in the Pakistani media that often glorifies the mindless violence of the Taliban. But she is a household name in Afghanistan and a known figure internationally. She was called "Afghanistan's most famous women" by the BBC a few years ago. Last April, she was ranked among the 100 most influential people of the world by Time Magazine. But Time asked Dutch-Somalian author Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who is known for her Islamophobic views, to make the announcement. Now settled in the US, Hirsi Ali distorted Joya's image in her malicious announcement by saying: "I hope in time [Joya] comes to see the US and NATO forces in her country as her allies. She must use her notoriety, her demonstrated wit and her resilience to get the troops on her side instead of out of her country". A furious Joya reacted strongly. In her counter-statement, she said: "Time has painted a false picture of me and does not mention anything at all about my struggle against the occupation of Afghanistan by the US and NATO, which is disgusting. In fact, everyone knows that I stand side-by-side with the glorious antiwar movements around the world and have proved time and again that I will never compromise with the US and NATO who have occupied my country, empowered the most bloody enemies of my people and are killing my innocent compatriots in Afghanistan". Joya earned a mark back in 2003 at the Loya Jirga (Greater Assembly) convened to ratify Afghanistan's new constitution. Unlike the US-sponsored, clean-shaven fundamentalists, Joya was not nominated by Karzai. She was elected by the people of the Farah province to represent them at the Loya Jirga. The Jirga was chaired by Sibghatullah Mojaddedi who, at the very outset, told the women delegates: "Even God has not given you equal rights because under His decision two women are equal to one man". Joya had bravely organised underground girls' schools in Herat when the Taliban's terror drove millions into exile. Mojaddedi's patriarchal admonition could not intimidate Joya. She stunned the Loya Jirga and the press members present to cover the occasion by delivering a three-minute, hard-hitting speech, exposing the crimes of the warlords running the Loya Jirga. A befuddled grey-bearded Sibghatullah Mojaddedi, on hearing Joya, screamed in anger and called her 'infidel' and 'communist'. Others also shouted at her. But before she was silenced by an angry mob of warlords, with her single, but timely, act she had electrified Afghanistan. When she criticised the warlords at the Loya Jirga, even 'Viceroy' Zalmay Khalilzad -- the then US envoy to Afghanistan -- was upset. "Joya", Khalilzad chided, "had overstepped the framework of politeness". She wrote a letter to Khalilzad, saying: "If these criminals raped your mother or daughter or even your grandmother, or killed seven of your sons, let alone destroyed all the moral and material treasure of your country, what words would you use against such criminals and puppets that will be inside the framework of politeness and respect?" In the meantime, three fateful minutes at the Loya Jirga changed the course of Joya's life. In her native province of Farah, locals wanted her to represent them in elections. It does not merely take guns and dollars to contest an election in Afghanistan. Joya had none. Still, she contested and was elected to parliament in 2005. Danish filmmaker Eva Mulvad immortalised Joya's courageous election campaign and subsequent victory in her documentary "Enemies of Happiness". Aged 25, Malalai Joya was the youngest Afghan MP. More importantly, she proved herself to be the bravest MP. On the floor of parliament, she emerged as the strongest critic of US occupation and the Taliban- and mujahidin-dominated Karzai regime. Hence, at almost every parliamentary session she attended, she had her hair pulled, was attacked physically and called names by her 'Islamist' colleagues. She was even threatened with rape on the floor of the house. In one case, the warlords bussed in thousands of men to Kabul to march and demand "Death to Joya". Niaz Mohammad Amiri, a member of Abdul Rasul Sayyaf's Wahabist party, would never miss an opportunity during parliamentary sessions to call her a prostitute. Flyers were distributed calling her prostitute, communist and anti-Islamic. "Among the worst was a leaflet that showed a photograph of me without my headscarf, falsely saying that the picture was taken at the Loya Jirga. Underneath was the awful slogan: she took off her scarf at the Loya Jirga, she'll take off her pants in parliament", Joya noted in her book Raising My Voice that has recently come out. Once she was abroad on Valentine's Day. It was propagated that she was abroad to celebrate Valentine's Day. In her two years in parliament, she never once had the chance to complete her speech without her microphone switched off. But even her half-delivered speeches were hard to tolerate. Hence, she was suspended from parliament. Her suspension has been widely criticised. From Noam Chomsky to Naomi Klein, a host of noted people have signed the petition for her reinstatement. She now leads an underground life. To hide her identity, she wears the burqa which she otherwise hates. In view of her previous experience, she has decided not to contest elections scheduled for September this year. The writer is a freelance contributor. Email: mfsulehria@hotmail.com Source :

http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=252624