[sacw] SACW #1 (29 Oct. 01)

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire | Dispatch #1.
29 October 2001
http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex

[ Interruption Notice: SACW dispatches will be interrupted between=20
the period 31st October - 7th November 2001]

------------------------------------------

#1. Human Rights Commission of Pakistan opposes outside influence in=20
Afghanistan
#2. Could Pakistan's stability be the main casualty of the Afghan=20
war? (MB Naqvi)
#3. Statement from All India Christian Council & All India Catholic=20
Union on Massacre of Christians in Pakistan
#4. How About Peace Against Terrorism? (Praful Bidwai)
#5. Pakistan Trade Union Federation (PTUF) holding of a 'Peace Rally'=20
30th Oct. 2001
#6. Pakistan: Heading towards a civil war? (Imtiaz Alam)
#7. India Pakistan Arms Race & Militarisation Watch (IPARMW) # 52 -27=20
October 2001

________________________

#1.

DAWN
28 October 2001

HRCP OPPOSES OUTSIDE INFLUENCE IN AFGHANISTAN
Bureau Report

PESHAWAR, Oct 27: Putting its weight behind holding of a Loya Jirga=20
for resolving the Afghan crisis, a one-day consultation of Human=20
Rights Commission of Pakistan here on Saturday asked all neighbouring=20
countries, including Pakistan, to stop interference in Afghanistan=20
and not to influence the composition of the Jirga.
The consultation on "Afghan crisis: an Assessment" condemned the=20
killing of commander Abdul Haq by the Taliban, saying "on the one=20
hand the Taliban have been asking for proof of Osama bin Laden's=20
involvement in terrorism, and on the other hand Abdul Haq was killed=20
without any trial and proof."
The gathering offered Fateha for commander Abdul Haq and other Afghan=20
people who died during the ongoing war. Briefing newsmen about the=20
consultation, former and present chairpersons of the commission, Asma=20
Jehangir and Afrasiab Khattak respectively said that the former=20
Afghan monarch Zahir Shah had the historical legitimacy to convene a=20
Jirga and the Afghan people should rally behind him.
They said that the consultation had also demanded that technocrats=20
and civil society members should be included in the Jirga, which=20
should be held in Afghanistan.
Ms Jehangir said Kabul or Jalalabad should be demilitarized and a=20
force should be raised from amongst the Afghans for its deployment=20
under the auspices of the United Nations.
The consultation condemned the Sept 11 attacks on World Trade Centre=20
and Pentagon, but at the same time it expressed concern over the=20
ongoing US airstrikes against Afghanistan which had resulted in the=20
killing of innocent Afghan people.
Ms Jehangir said, "War is never a recipe for peace, therefore the=20
attacks on Afghanistan should be stopped."
The former chairperson of HRCP regretted that the history of Afghans=20
had been distorted by elements with vested interests, saying, "Afghan=20
society was not that of nomads and they were robbed of all their=20
culture. We have to return back what we have robbed from them."
Ms Jehangir informed that the consultation had asked the government=20
to allow entry of Afghan refugees as they had been facing war and=20
drought in Afghanistan. She said that the present situation had=20
provided an opportunity for the development and reconstruction of=20
Afghanistan.
The HRCP office bearers said that instead of war the Pakistani=20
government should use its influence over the Taliban to resolve the=20
crisis. Answering a query, they said that unfortunately none of the=20
key players, including Pakistan, had learnt any lesson from history=20
and they have still been trying to influence the Afghan people. They=20
added, "It is up to the people of Afghanistan and not the=20
neighbouring countries to decide who should be members of the Loya=20
Jirga."
Earlier, the consultation was addressed by Afghan intellectuals,=20
representatives of different political parties, academicians and=20
human rights activists.
Prominent among the speakers were journalist Ahmad Rasheed, former=20
ministers of Afghanistan Rasheed Waziri and Babrak Shinwari, Afghan=20
intellectual Professor Rasool Ameen, Dr Fazal Kareem Marwat of=20
Peshawar University, chief of Afghan women council Fatana Ishaq=20
Gillani, provincial chief of PPP Khwaja Muhammad Khan Hoti,=20
information secretary of ANP Haji Muhammad Adeel, and provincial=20
secretary general of PML(N) Iqbal Zafar Jhagra.

______

#2.

COULD PAKISTAN'S STABILITY BE THE MAIN CASUALTY OF THE AFGHAN WAR?
M.B. Naqvi
Karachi October 28:

Could Pakistan's stability be the main casualty of the Afghan war? As
China's latest statement, expressing concern for Pakistan's stability,
shows that it takes the threat to be real. The statement was in response
to the steadily accumulating reports of the ongoing ferment among tribes
and people straddling the famous Karrakoram Highway connecting the two
countries. It is a concern shared by many leading members of the grand
alliance that has been cobbled together by the US against Terrorism and
the war against the Taliban-controlled Afghanistan. An impressive
cavalcade of government leaders has been passing through Islamabad. They
all show solidarity and friendship with Pakistan. They also intend to
shore up the military regime of Gen. Pervez Musharraf and do not fail to
promise some help for Pakistan economy which, in their view, will
stabilise the regime and the state.

It is a fine statement of intent. There appears to be sufficient fear
behind their assessments that Pakistan might be destabilised by the
opposition to the war. But whether their judgement of what, or how much
of their, help will do the trick cannot be taken for granted. Islamabad,
as the concerned party, will surely want to know the strength of the
intent to act behind the fast running streams of the rhetoric of
friendly admiration for the courageous decision Musharraf has taken to
side with the Bush-Blair coalition=92. Pakistani officials dealing with
the economy are certainly upbeat about the prospects of substantial aid
for the economy that is sure to arrive.

But there are other non-official economists that are not overly
impressed with the promised aid. The economists are concerned with the
quantum as well as the quality of the promises. Though the promised
assistance cannot be called peanuts, they do not fail to see a definite
design on the part of the leaders of the west: the time lag between the
promise and disbursement is being deliberately kept notable. Then the
intention of keeping Pakistan on a short financial leash is visible to
them. Then, they see that if the west really wanted to help relieve the
Musharraf regime of economic worries, it should have forgiven some of
the $ 15 or 16 billion bilateral debts. That would free up up to $ 3
billion in debt servicing and then rescheduling of debt servicing burden
on the multilateral agencies=92 loans will go a long way to stabilise the
economy. Adequate cash grants or other easy credit would enable
Islamabad to repay the high interest short-term loans from private
banks. None of this seems to have impressed anyone in the west. Japan
has just politely sidestepped the request to write off $ 5 billion worth
of its loans.

When one focuses on the substance of what is being actually offered,
some doubts crop up over the exact intentions of the US and its
strategists. But where the perceptions of the risks that Musharraf
regime is running are concerned, the western effort --- necessarily
measured by the wordage being expanded --- seems not inconsiderable. To
allay the fears of the Pakistan's quasi-secular rightwing rulers or the
socalled establishment --- who complain that the US used Pakistan in
1980s Afghan war and after victory left it to stew in its own juice ---
the US Ambassador Wendy Chaimberlin has said on Friday that the US is
working on a 50 year plan to strengthen and develop Pakistan economy.
These words would be brave music to the congenitally pro-American
establishment and from the particular drum from which they wanted to
hear. But others have shrugged their shoulders saying: a fifty year
economic plan by an American Administration and that too for a foreign
country like Pakistan --- it beats imagination.

But the loud background music is certainly enough to frighten all
diplomats who work in Islamabad. Within just one week, the Karrakoram
Highway has remained barricaded at many place, it has been blocked for
the better part of the week, tribesmen armed with lethal small and
not-so-small arms are demonstrating and proclaiming their intent to
fight both the US aggressors and the Pakistan government which has sold
itself to them. Elsewhere in the tribal areas of NWFP lashkars are being
formed to go to Afghanistan to fight in support to Taliban. Pictures of
Osama are everywhere. Demos by the new coalition of religious parties,
the Defence of Afghanistan and Pakistan Council, are being held daily up
and down the country even in small towns.

Strangest of all, even in the fastnesses of Sindh province such demos
are as frequent as in the Punjab, though the most impressive demos ---
of different kinds, of course --- are being organised in NWFP and
Karachi. This Friday saw a rally called Million March, a huge gathering
by any standards, though there are the usual caveats and differing
assessments of the numbers involved, ranging from "thousands" to
"several hundred thousand" depending upon who is making the assessment
or is inspiring a wire service story.

The kind of ferment there is in the sections that are impressed and
influenced by religious parties and the division that has taken place in
the raucous Right, the main constituency of the regime, cannot but pose
a serious threat to the regime's stability, indeed its survival. And
yet, American calculations and calibrated pressures on Pakistan have not
abated. They have only meant a lot of beautiful verbiage, some money and
demonstration of solidarity by main western governments. To most
observers it looks as if the west is engaged in coaxing Musharraf regime
into playing a more active role, rather than mere facilitation of the US
war effort.

Now that the war is three weeks old and Taliban's ability to survive the
worst the US air power can do has come through loud and clear, what
happens next is the question. Expert opinion, locally available that is,
is that there is no option for the US and British governments but to
cajole or pressurise Pakistan into using its own troops, equipment and
intelligence to pull western chestnuts out of Afghan fire --- while
their propaganda machines goes on romanticising their own special forces
and units, mainly for the benefit of home opinion. But should Musharraf
succumb further, the threat of destabilisation would move from his
Presidency to that of the country itself.

______

#3.

Statement from All India Christrian Council and All India Catholic=20
Union on Massacre of Christians in Pakistan

Please correspond with Secretary General at:
505 Media Apartments, Link Society
18 I.P. Extension, Delhi 110092 India
Phone (91 11) 2722262 Fax 2726582 Mobile 09811021072
Email: <mailto:johndayal@v...>johndayal@v...

Indian Christian Community shocked at massacre in Pakistan Church
Protect Minorities, General Pervez [Musharraf ] told in Urgent Fax

PRESS STATEMENT
NEW DELHI, Sunday 28 October 20001

The All India Christian Council and the All India Catholic Union have=20
in a joint statement expressed their shock at the massacre of=20
Pakistani Christians who were killed while at prayer in a Church in=20
Bahawalpur near Multan this morning. The two Christian organisations=20
have in an urgent fax message called on Pakistani president General=20
Pervez to take immediate steps to safeguard the country's minority=20
populations from violence by extremist armed groups.

The following is the text of the statement issued by Dr John Dayal,=20
National vice President of the All India catholic Union and the=20
Secretary general of the All India Christian Council on Sunday.

"The entire Indian Christian community is shocked at the brutal=20
massacre of Pakistani Catholics who had gathered for the morning=20
Sunday mass in a Church in Bahawalpur today. According to reports,=20
armed men of an unnamed fundamentalist group came to the church on=20
motorcycles, forced their way inside during Mass, first killed the=20
Priest and then sprayed the innocent worshippers, who included many=20
women and children, with bullets from automatic weapons. While 19=20
persons were reported dead in the first reports, dozens are in=20
hospital with critical injuries.

The Christian community, a micro minority at less than two per cent=20
of the population, has been under much stress in recent years,=20
targeted by religious bigots as well as by the government's anti=20
infamous blasphemy laws. After the terrorist attacks on America on 11=20
September, certain groups in Pakistan openly threatened the Christian=20
community with violence. Archbishop Lawrence Saldanha of Lahore, who=20
had prayed for the victims both of the September terrorist attacks=20
and the military retaliation going on in Afghanistan, had cautioned=20
some days ago that he feared the military intervention in Afghanistan=20
could have unpredictable consequences. The Archbishop had told=20
general Pervez Musharraf that the greatest danger for minorities in=20
Pakistan was in villages where there is less protection.

Despite warnings from Christian leaders, and their own assurances,=20
the government of Pakistan failed to take due precautions. We call=20
upon President General Pervez Musharraf to take appropriate measures=20
to ensure the safety and security of the Christians, Hindu and Sikh=20
minority groups in Pakistan.

The Christian community at large has made it clear that it does not=20
see the post-September 11 situation as a strife between Islam and=20
Christianity. Christian leaders have condemned the terrorist attacks=20
on New York in unequivocal terms. They have voiced their opposition=20
to war on innocent people. In his first message to New York after the=20
terrorist attacks, Pope John Paul II said "To all I solemnly repeat=20
the Gospel injunction not to be conquered by evil, but to conquer=20
evil with good, to trust in the power of God's grace to transform=20
human hearts and to work fearlessly to shape a future of justice,=20
peace and security for the children of our world.'

We pray for an end to terrorism and we pray for peace. We pray for=20
all victims of terrorism, in New York and Bahawalpur and other=20
places, and for the victims of war, the innocent men, women and=20
children who have been killed and injured in Afghanistan. Unthinking=20
and bigoted acts of violence, and vengeful reprisals, will only add=20
to the suffering of the people and injure the prospects of lasting=20
peace in this region.

______

#4.

Hindustan Times (India)
Monday, October 29, 2001

HOW ABOUT PEACE AGAINST TERRORISM?
Praful Bidwai

On Tuesday, thousands of people will march from Delhi's Red Fort to=20
condemn terrorism and demand an end to the Afghanistan war, which=20
claims more and more innocent lives each day. This 'rainbow=20
coalition' encompasses artistes and scholars, students and=20
researchers, writers and trade unionists, schoolteachers and=20
theatre-people, human-rights activists and feminists.

They are only one contingent of the growing international peace=20
movement which has mobilised lakhs in over 40 countries and three=20
continents on a robustly secular platform.

These demonstrations differ sharply from the protests by those - like=20
the Jama Masjid's Imam - who may condemn the September 11 carnage and=20
even Osama bin Laden, but nevertheless regard the war as a contest=20
between the West and Islam. Ironically, many of their Hindutva=20
'adversaries' buy that argument, but take the opposite side. They=20
both want war all the same.

To understand what the peaceniks want, consider this:

* America's war is being waged as having a just cause, but its ends=20
are diffused, open-ended, shifting and becoming excessive. Its means=20
are becoming patently unjust with the use of unlimited force. The=20
Al-Qaeda is demonically committed to waging an unending=20
'civilisational' war against the rest of the world, obliterating=20
distinctions between civilian and military targets. But the US has=20
failed to adequately defend those distinctions and circumscribe=20
military action by reasonable political objectives. It isn't acting=20
within a framework of moral and legal restraint.

* The US can justifiably act in self-defence (despite its past denial=20
of this right to others), but it has no legal or moral-political=20
sanction to extend its target beyond the Al-Qaeda and the Taliban.=20
Yet, it shifts the target for political expediency. It now wants to=20
compromise with, not eliminate, the Taliban. It has also arrogantly=20
notified the UN Security Council - whose proper authorisation the war=20
lacks - that it intends to pursue terrorists elsewhere too. This=20
could become an open-ended 'crusade'.

* Going by credible accounts, over 1,000 non-combatant civilians have=20
perished. The unconscionable October 10 killing of 200 in Khorram,=20
and bombing of a Herat hospital, are unrelated to military necessity.=20
As is the destruction of ICRC food depots. The hospital bombing isn't=20
qualitatively different from the shocking Baghdad air-raid shelter=20
attack of 1991, which killed 400. Such damage is likely to grow as=20
the war intensifies, cluster-bombs are used, ground-troops intervene,=20
and the Taliban dissolve among the population. Nothing justifies=20
indiscriminate or disproportionate military force.

* The war will greatly increase the misery of an already=20
impoverished, famine-affected population in the world's poorest=20
country with a life expectancy of 40. According to UNICEF, the coming=20
winter will kill up to 50,000 children. The war will further raise=20
the human toll, making it disproportionate to the September 11=20
casualties.

* US confusion over ends and means, along with xenophobic hounding of=20
ethnic minorities, permits terrorism's apologists to paint the war as=20
another 'crusade' against Islam. With more excesses in Afghanistan,=20
their appeal will grow, defeating the goal of discrediting and=20
fighting terrorism.

* The 'anti-terrorist' coalition is fraying at the edges. It seems=20
deeply compromised by the presence of States with a horrifying human=20
rights record - including Saudi Arabia and Oman, and the former=20
colonial powers, and at another level, Pakistan, India and Russia.=20
The Al-Qaeda's recently exposed close links with the Saudi royals,=20
and America's dependence on their gory regime, could impair the=20
achievement of even minimalist ends.

This case against the war shares nothing with the=20
opportunist-political argument ('join the bandwagon and push your own=20
narrow agenda') on which many coalition States have signed up,=20
including Pakistan and India. It thoroughly opposes=20
Islamic-fundamentalist arguments which demonise not just the West,=20
but modernity and rationalism too. Yet, it does not equate America,=20
with its own history of State terrorism, with the sub-State=20
terrorists. On the contrary, it recognises that America's own=20
imperiousness cannot be moderated while virulent groups like the=20
Al-Qaeda are at large.

The peace movement is greatly inspired by the fine sensitivities of=20
the Gandhian tradition. But it doesn't insist that all evils must=20
only be countered by non-violent means, without resort to measured=20
military action. The nature of contemporary terrorism makes that=20
approach impractical.

The Indian peace movement is particularly concerned with three other=20
issues. First, the connection between the Afghanistan war and the war=20
'within' - being waged by the Hindutva forces to communalise society=20
and paint Islam itself with the terrorist brush. The banning of SIMI,=20
VHP's incursion into the Ayodhya 'temple' (with the Centre's=20
connivance), the storming of the Taj Mahal, the Prevention of=20
Terrorism Ordinance, and the 'pro-active' adventurism in Kashmir, are=20
all part of this dangerous agenda, itself related to the BJP's=20
cynical electoral calculus in UP. This must be countered.

Second, September 11 exposed the colossal stupidity of relying upon=20
massive military force alone for security. Real, comprehensive, human=20
security requires social cohesion, based on security of livelihood,=20
fundamental rights and shared goals of justice and equality.

Contrariwise, the fight against terrorism can't be won by crude=20
physical/military means. This makes security inseparable from the=20
struggle for peace and justice.

Finally, South Asia's unique nuclear hostility makes it the world's=20
most dangerous region. India and Pakistan, locked in a=20
half-century-long Hot'n'Cold war, have plenty of these horror=20
weapons, but few safeguards against their accidental or unauthorised=20
use. The arrest of allegedly pro-Taliban Pakistani nuclear scientists=20
Bashiruddin Mahmood and Abdul Majeed should further alarm us.

Pakistan's nuclear arsenal isn't safe or secure. Under a social=20
implosion or military churning, it could fall into terrorist hands.=20
That will menace not just India - which so blithely cajoled and=20
chided Pakistan to go nuclear - but the whole world. This underscores=20
the burning practical necessity of abolishing all mass-destruction=20
weapons globally.

______

#5.

The News International (Pakistan)
29 October 2001

PEACE RALLY
By our correspondent

KARACHI: Pakistan Trade Union Federation (PTUF) has announced the=20
holding of a 'Peace Rally' against the US attacks on Afghanistan, on=20
October 30. A PTUF meeting presided over by Kaneez Fatima strongly=20
condemned the allied forces' attacks on Afghanistan. The meeting=20
noted that the people of Afghanistan were facing victimisation for a=20
long time by foreign forces. It decided to take out the peace rally=20
from PTUF Central Office, near Khamosh Colony at 3 pm. The rally=20
would terminate at Regal Chowk.

PTUF Provincial General Secretary, Noor Muhammad, addressing the=20
meeting said that the war would not bring about any economic benefits=20
for Pakistan and instead Pakistan would have to suffer badly in=20
future. So it was not fair to become a part of allied forces.

Noor further suggested that Pakistan should play a vital role in the=20
promotion of peace and protection of human rights in Afghanistan, and=20
that the Pakistani rulers should use their good offices to stop the=20
attacks on Afghanistan.

Pervez Jadoon, Muhammad Arif, Beharmand Khan, Muhammad Riaz, Muhammad=20
Younus Jadoon, Muhammad Sadiq, Qamaruz Zamman and other leaders also=20
condemned the imperialist forces for attacking Afghanistan.

______

#6.

The News International (Pakistan)
29 October 2001
Op-ed.

Heading towards a civil war?
by Imtiaz Alam

The Council for the Defence of Afghanistan (CDA), a conglomerate of=20
religious and jihadi parties in Pakistan, has given November 7 as the=20
deadline to reverse the current policy of alignment with the US and=20
withdrawal of whatever limited cooperation Islamabad has been=20
providing to the allied forces. Failing which the CDA will launch a=20
movement for civil disobedience that will include occupation of=20
highways, wheel-jam strikes, resignations of state-employees,=20
non-payment of taxes and a sustained agitation leading to the=20
overthrow of the rulers it has dubbed as "security risk". One wonders=20
whether the religious right is working against Pakistan or the US, as=20
it prepares for a bloody showdown? It seems, the religious extremists=20
have finally decided just not to take on the Musharraf government,=20
but also paralyse Pakistan, a front-line state in the ongoing war=20
against terrorism.

Encouraged by the increasing response it has got from among its=20
religious constituencies, the religious right has sharpened and=20
expanded its political onslaught. Now the campaign is being termed as=20
"jihad against terrorism against Islam" and General Pervez Musharraf=20
being dubbed as "traitor" and a "security risk", as the "sacred=20
cause" of defending the Taliban regime overrides Pakistan's own=20
national security and survival interests. The sentiments are now=20
running very high with the prolongation of US bombing in Afghanistan=20
amid increasing civilian casualties. A divided heart and mind between=20
a concern for Pakistan and solidarity with fellow Muslims and Pakhtun=20
brethren across the Durand Line, being seen as a victim of barbarous=20
bombing, is now more inclined to take a desperate course, regardless=20
of its horrible consequences for Pakistan.

A private army of more than 10,000 armed volunteers, formed by Tehrik=20
Nifaz Shariat-i-Mohammedi (TNSM) in Malakand Agency, has moved to=20
Bajur to enter Afghanistan, whereas at some other points the clerics=20
and tribal elders have joined hands to provide all kinds of=20
assistance to the Taliban while restricting the writ of the state and=20
activities of anti-Taliban elements. Over 3000 armed zealots have=20
blockaded the Karakoram highway at about nine points, from Kohistan=20
to Northern Areas. A countrywide agitation, after a brief slowdown,=20
has again picked up some momentum with the possibilities of mutinies=20
in some areas, such as Malakand and Kohistan in NWFP, beside a=20
volatile tribal belt. Predictably, the focal points remain where=20
Deobandi-Pakhtun nexus can defy the state authority. Where the=20
religious right has failed to stir a mass agitation, such as in the=20
Punjab, sectarian militant groups will resort to communal killings,=20
as happened in Bahawalpur where a jihadi sectarian outfit allegedly=20
killed 16 Christians. These are just few initial expressions of what=20
is expected in the days and weeks ahead when forces of religious=20
extremism will finally challenge the state authority.

As the military operation is expected to take a longer time and a=20
failure to achieve military and political objectives will result in=20
escalation of bombing and, consequently, resulting in increased=20
civilian casualties, the religious extremists will continue to get an=20
added emotional fuel to stir public sentiment and push its own=20
agenda. What matters to the clergy, especially Deobandi/Wahabi=20
section, is the expansion of its political influence and=20
consolidation of its power in certain regions and sections of=20
population. In its political and ideological scheme, Taliban regime=20
matters more than a Pakistan that has been coerced into standing with=20
the "infidel West". From a pure theological standpoint, what is=20
important to it is the "defence of the faith" rather than the need to=20
save the nation-state that the clergy abhors as secular.

At this juncture when its ideological offshoot, Taliban and Mulla=20
Omar regime, is faced with the worst challenge of its survival, the=20
Deobandi/Wahabi clergy and the jihadi forces at large will go to any=20
length in strategically neutralising and, if possible, converting a=20
most pivotal front-line state, Pakistan, into an active reserve of=20
the Taliban, or may preferably be a full-fledged front against the=20
West. They in fact want to get rid of this geographical divide, that=20
separates Afghanistan from Pakistan, in the name of preferable=20
ideological affinity. What is quite alarming is that for the first=20
time in Pakistan's history the clergy is getting an immense moral and=20
material support from even those sections of middle classes who=20
otherwise kept a distance from the extremists despite their=20
religiosity and conservatism. A massive campaign for funding and=20
raising volunteers is in full swing and the clergy is finding even=20
most resourceful people quite responsive. Anti-American sentiment is=20
so overwhelming that even the nationalist and some humanist sections=20
are inclined to hesitantly render a helping hand to the religious=20
extremists.

If the last three-week of bombing failed to break Taliban's resolve=20
to fight back, the religious right has succeeded in winning large=20
sections of people in its more than six weeks of relentless=20
campaigning. From a defensive and apologetic posture on the September=20
11 tragedy, it has moved towards a very offensive position. It has=20
been greatly helped by the failure of the US in assuaging the Muslim=20
mind and blunder of fighting an unconventional war with highly=20
devastating means of a regular warfare. So far, and not ironically,=20
the conventional warrior has responded the way the terrorist would=20
have wanted. The biggest beneficiary of this situation is Osama and=20
his Al-Qaida who now fully controls Taliban who have, in turn,=20
succeeded in capitalising on the Pakhtun-Afghan sentiment. The tragic=20
end of famous commander Abdul Haq is a testimony to the ascendance of=20
extremism over moderation. In what appears to be a clash between=20
Islam and the West, the religious extremists have captured the=20
centrestage of an anguished Muslim world. Most allied allies of the=20
West in the Muslim world and even the US toadies have either been=20
neutralised or restrained by the rising tide of anger against the=20
West. All to the advantage of Osama and his adventurist project.

Even Pakistan has been constrained to keep its support to the war=20
against terrorism within the limits as opposed to an extended role it=20
had played during the last Afghan war. Pakistan's case is more=20
precarious than any other Muslim nation, thanks to its=20
religious-ethnic proximity to Afghanistan, its thoughtless meddling=20
in the Afghan quagmire and prolonged flirtation with the jihadi=20
paradigm and the extremist elements. Sudden reversal of a flawed=20
Afghan policy did not allow it enough time to win back the space it=20
had abandoned long ago to the religious extremists and the jihadi=20
forces. Retrieving it from the extremists with the help of the=20
international community and liberal-modernist-patriotic forces at=20
home may still be possible. But it's an immensely difficult task that=20
cannot be achieved without a bold reversal of a Ziaist-state in every=20
sense and at all levels. And it cannot be achieved without the full=20
assertion of state authority with the unstinted support of the=20
moderate political and social forces who are still alienated.

Although the religious extremists have been partially successful in=20
exploiting the anti-American sentiment, they have not still been able=20
to win a majority of the people to the side of jihad, especially in=20
the Punjab, interior Sindh and the Baloch areas in Balochistan. To=20
augment its appeal to the Muslims, it uses the unifying illusions of=20
fighting the "infidels" and "satanic Americans" and invoking Islamic=20
injunctions of jihad and notions of Muslim brotherhood, the clergy=20
remains a sectarian force by virtue of its own character. Despite a=20
facade of unity, they are seriously divided within and are competing=20
to outflank one another, like both the factions of JUI and the=20
Jamaat-i-Islami. But the irony is that the so-called "moderates" of=20
Jamaat or in JUI are increasingly becoming a tale of the militants=20
and will finally lose ground to the extremist section of=20
Wahabi/Deobanid clergy. A clash between the state and the militants=20
that a section of Deobandi clergy is desperately trying to engineer=20
will set the process of marginalisation of Jamaat and other moderates=20
into motion. So far, the state has been avoiding and ducking. But for=20
how long and how will it succeed without the active support of=20
modernist-moderate-liberal forces?

The writer is a staff member

______

#7.

INDIA PAKISTAN ARMS RACE & MILITARISATION WATCH (IPARMW) # 52
27 October 2001
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IPARMW/message/63

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/

SACW is an informal, independent & non-profit citizens wire service run by
South Asia Citizens Web (http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex) since 1996. To=20
subscribe send a blank
message to: <act-subscribe@yahoogroups.com> / To unsubscribe send a blank
message to: <act-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
________________________________________
DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not
necessarily reflect the views of SACW compilers.

--=20