[ALOCHONA] Beware of the Indian think tanks and research/analysis forums

Beware of the Indian think tanks and research/analysis forums

Zoglul Husain
zoglul@hotmail.com

India has many think tanks such as South Asian Terrorism Portal(SATP), South Asian Analysis Group(SAAG),Institute for Conflict Management , The Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS), Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA), Indian Defence Review (IDR) etc and a host of intelligence agencies like RAW, one of whose jobs it is to contrive bizarre fictions, based on concocted stories to fit their malicious and fabricated propaganda in order to serve their hegemonic conspiracies.

Especially since 1991, the US Neocons-Israel-India evil axis has been collaborating with the aim of destroying the Muslim countries for oil and general plunder. But they have now been defeated by the valiant grassroots of Afghanistan and Iraq. We are now seeing new developments in the Middle East, which will probably need about ten years to settle down, but the evil axis is now definitely downhill.

The JMB in Bangladesh was created by India and the HuJI-B by Israel to impart a terrorist image to Bangladesh so that the evil axis can achieve its targets of domination and plunder in Bangladesh with the support of their allies. Huge amounts of explosives and bomb making equipment were brought from India to Bangladesh for this purpose. At least four Indian govt factories were involved in the supply.

The recent Mumbai bomb attacks shortly before Hillary's visit to India, may have been a false flag attack to persuade Hillary to support their heinous conspiracies. It is also known that India's own operatives have connections in various countries along with their intelligence network.

__._,_.___

[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] Is a third party working to destabilise the country?

Is a third party working to destabilise the country?

As the slanderous comments on the Prophet by a handful of Hindu school teachers are on the sporadic rise in the wake of the recent sexual harassment of a young girl student of the city's Viqarunnesa Girls' School and College, people now wonder if any unholy quarter is at work to destabilize the country's social harmony.
   The uneasy feeling is only getting credence as a recent write-up of the Indian strategic thinker Swami Subramonium, circulated in an Indian daily, laid emphasis on capturing Bangladesh territory from Sylhet to Khulna to create a Hindu vassal state here.
   It will not only destroy Islamic fundamentalists in this country but also contribute to wiping out extremist Muslims from India, he argued. Foreign Minister Dr Dipu Moni said that the fear of Indian hegemony in Bangladesh is only a "juju" or bugbear story played by vested interest quarters, and that it will never come true. But Subramonium's article will only add fear of the people and especially the slanderous comments of the handful Hindu teachers provoking communal harmony may only make things worse. The government should be on high alert.
   
   Socio-religious coexistence
   Bangladesh is known for its pleasant socio-religious coexistence as a moderate Muslim nation where communal tension, least to speak of any violence, is but anything that one can remember in its post-Liberation history. People are religious but at the same time anti-communalism here, living and working side by side with the other communities in peace and harmony. Their psyche is built by the region's liberal doctrines, accommodating and respectful to neighbours.
   More singularly, the country's educational establishments, especially the primary and secondary schools, have been the bastion of peace and learning until recently.
   There was hardly any instance of the nasty sorts of things from teaching staff like hurling abuse to the Prophets or holy men of any other communities.
   
   Motive behind it
   It was unheard of and also unthinkable. But a spate of such disgusting acts and comments are now on the rise leaving the people to wonder what may be the motive behind it. Especially why a handful of Hindu teachers are taking the extra risks at schools' classrooms to hurl sacrilegious comments on the holy Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him) and the Muslim way of life.
   They wonder why they are acting in a way that may not only agitate the vast Muslim majority but also can bring dent on the popularity of the government.
   The present government of Sheikh Hasina is politically very supportive to the Hindu community as it is placing more and more teachers from this community to schools and colleges.
   It is also putting more officials at all levels of the administration and technical jobs.
   But why in this situation a handful of them are increasingly speaking on the communal terms in school classrooms, it is difficult understand.
   
   Proxy to a third party
   So the question which may increasingly agitate the public mind is whether these people are acting on their own or as proxy to a third party which wants to see a kind of unrest in the country. What do they want to achieve from insulting the prophet, they ponder. They question, whether it is the emergence of a new combative mentality in a new political landscape.
   Porimol Joydhor was one of them who later raped a school girl in the closed door when she went to attend tutorial classes he was conducting. It is perhaps the first such violation of a student by a teacher in this country.
   
   Sacrilegious comment
   Next comes the sacrilegious comment of Shankar Biswas on Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him) in the classroom at a Tongipara High School in Gopalganj district. Biswas said that Prophet Mohammad was a "goat since wore beard". When the students came out of the classrooms and local people joined the agitation, he fled away.
   The district administration however took quick steps to restore peace by announcing his dismissal from the job.
   No sooner had this dust settled, Modan Mohad Das, the assistant head master in Dhaka city's Dhanmondi Boys' High School made yet another slanderous comment on the Prophet to students in the classrooms. He is in the habit of making such derogatory comment publicly on the Prophet's married life.
   It provoked the students to come out of classrooms last week in protest. They laid siege on the busy city street including a section of Manik Miah Avenue. The government without delay removed him and transferred to a school at Panchaghar but he could not join the new work place again in the face of protest. The government later put him on temporary suspension.
   Ratan Pal of Tejgaon Civil Aviation School is also reported to have been engaged in sexually harassing girl students but he is still in place despite protest from students and their guardians. Another Hindu teacher at a school at Dhamrai, some 30km from Dhaka city, was recently chased by the students and local residents for hurling abusive comments on the Prophet.
   
   Maintaining harmony
   These are only few cases but a rise of the practice, analysts say, may eventually cause greater resentment and it may be the objective of an unholy quarter which may be working to disrupt the country's communal harmony.
   The government and civil society leaders must keep watch on these unusual developments so that the country does not fall victim to any conspiracy of any quarter.

http://www.weeklyholiday.net/front.html#05

__._,_.___

[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] India's transit plan and security of Bangladesh

India's transit plan and security of Bangladesh

Sadeq Khan

The Economist, in its 30 July issue, noted in an article entitled "Embraceable you", noted how "growing geopolitical interests push India to seek better relations nearer home" with Bangladesh. It reads:
   "NOT much noticed by outsiders, long-troubled ties between two neighbours sharing a long border have taken a substantial lurch for the better. Ever since 2008, when the Awami League, helped by bags of Indian cash and advice, triumphed in general elections in Bangladesh, relations with India have blossomed. To Indian delight, Bangladesh has cracked down on extremists with ties to Pakistan or India's home-grown terrorist group, the Indian Mujahideen, as well as on vociferous Islamist (and anti-Indian) politicians in the country. India feels that bit safer.
  

Now the dynasts who rule each country are cementing political ties. On July 25th Sonia Gandhi (pictured, above) swept into Dhaka, the capital, for the first time. Sharing a sofa with Sheikh Hasina (left), the prime minister (and old family friend), the head of India's ruling Congress Party heaped praise on her host, notably for helping the poor. A beaming Sheikh Hasina reciprocated with a golden gong, a posthumous award for Mrs Gandhi's mother-in-law, Indira Gandhi. In 1971 she sent India's army to help Bangladeshis, led by Sheikh Hasina's father, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, throw off brutal Pakistani rule. As a result, officials this week chirped that relations are now very excellent. They should get better yet. India's prime minister, Manmohan Singh, will visit early in September to sign deals on sensitive matters like sharing rivers, sending electricity over the border, settling disputed patches of territory on the 4,095km (2,500-mile) frontier and stopping India's trigger-happy border guards from murdering migrants and cow-smugglers. Mr Singh may also deal with the topic of trade which, smuggling aside, heavily favours India, to Bangladeshi ire.
  

Most important, however, is a deal on setting up a handful of transit routes across Bangladesh, to reach India's remote, isolated north-eastern states. These are the seven sisters wedged up against the border with China. On the face of it, the $10 billion project will develop poor areas cut off from India's booming economy. The Asian Development Bank and others see Bangladeshi gains too, from better roads, ports, railways and much-needed trade. In Dhaka, the capital, the central-bank governor says broader integration with India could lift economic growth by a couple of percentage points, from nearly 7% already."
  

Contrary to Bangladesh Bank governor's claim of 2% increase in GDP from the transit plan, economists in Bangladesh are by now expressly unsure about the commercial benefits compared to socio-economic costs of allowing a number of additional transit routes to Indian northeast for Indian traffic (India has a stable land and railway route on rocky grounds within its own territory through Siliguri corridor). Transit fees may hardly compensate costs of maintenance of transit highways on our soft soil, and the loss of arable land to this "connectivity venture" which is not at all a priority for our national development. Connectivity grows out of natural trade routes. It is only over a long period of time that strategic routes developed for primarily for emergency connectivity may or may not become a flourishing trade route. The fissure of the Stillwell Road connecting India and China through Myanmar during the Second World War is a case in point. As a matter of fact, there is apprehension amongst Bangladeshi businessmen that they may lose their existing market in Tripura and Assam from the expanded India-to-India connectivity through Bangladesh.
   What is more worrisome is the fact that while the mainstream Indian media has picked up the refrain that India now needs its smaller neighbours, particularly Bangladesh, more than the latter may do, to be able to play a balancing role to China in the Asian theatre, the Research and Analysis minders of the Indian Security State are continuing to keep hanging a Damocles' Sword of Indian might over neighbours like Bangladesh. Writing on-line in Daily News & Analysis, Subramanian Swamy on July 16 resurrected the allegation of so-called illegal immigration tide from Bangladesh to India ahead of Sonia visit. He accused border traffic of Bangladeshis of being part of an "Islamic" strategy to "change India's demography by illegal immigration, conversion, and refusal to adopt family planning," and "turn India into Darul Islam" and recommended that as a counterstrategy, India must "annex land from Bangladesh in proportion to the illegal migrants from that country staying in India. At present, the northern third from Sylhet to Khulna can be annexed to re-settle illegal migrants." There is no assurance for Bangladesh in such comments at all about any change in India's domineering mindset.
 

 In fact there is need for Bangladesh to be worried about its own security in ceding to the Indian plan for transit through our territory. As the Economist observes in the same article: "The new transit project may be about more than just development. Some in Dhaka, including military types, suspect it is intended to create an Indian security corridor. It could open a way for army supplies to cross low-lying Bangladesh rather than going via dreadful mountain roads vulnerable to guerrilla attack. As a result, India could more easily put down insurgents in Nagaland and Manipur. The military types fear it might provoke reprisals by such groups in Bangladesh.
   More striking, India's army might try supplying its expanding divisions parked high on the border with China, in Arunachal Pradesh. China disputes India's right to Arunachal territory, calling it South Tibet. Some Bangladeshis fret that if India tries to overcome its own logistical problems by, in effect, using Bangladesh as a huge military marshalling yard, reprisals from China would follow."
   Whether or not there would be actual reprisals from northeast Indian insurgents or disaffection from China on account of the Indian transit plan through Bangladesh, it would be wise to weigh the security repercussions of "the new transit project" along with economic implications and trade prospects.
  

The Economist also suggests that India is undertaking the project on slippery grounds: "For India, however, the risk is that it is betting too heavily on Sheikh Hasina, who is becoming increasingly autocratic. Opposition boycotts of parliament and general strikes are run-of-the-mill. Corruption flourishes at levels astonishing even by South Asian standards. A June decision to rewrite the constitution looks to be a blunt power grab, letting the government run the next general election by scrapping a "caretaker" arrangement. Sheikh Hasina is building a personality cult around her murdered father, "the greatest Bengali of the millennium", says the propaganda.
  

Elsewhere, the hounding of Muhammad Yunus, a Nobel laureate and founder of the Grameen Bank who briefly flirted with politics, was vindictive. Similarly, war-crimes trials over the events of 1971 are to start in a few weeks. They are being used less as a path to justice than to crush an opposition Islamic party, Jamaat-e-Islami. It hardly suggests that India's ally has a wholly secure grasp on power.
   "When he visits Bangladesh in September, Mr Singh, the Gandhi family retainer, would do well to make wider contact if India's newly improving relations are not one day to take another big dive for the worse."

http://www.weeklyholiday.net/front.html#03

__._,_.___

[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] The Curious Case of Rohingya Refugees

The Curious Case of Rohingya Refugees

ZIAUDDIN CHOUDHURY looks at possible ways to solve the issue of the Rohingya refugees.

Typically we in Bangladesh are used to seeing our people migrate to other countries in search of work, a better living, or simply to escape harsh economic conditions. We are used to emigration from our country, and not immigration. That perception was changed abruptly when we faced a large-scale influx of people in our eastern border, from the state of Arakan -- a large swath of land in Burma, now Myanmar, in April 1978.

I had joined Chittagong (greater Chittagong that included Cox's Bazar) as Deputy Commissioner toward the end of March 1978. As I was getting to know my new district I was suddenly sucked into this maelstrom in the south eastern corner. From the middle of April a seemingly unending flow of people started to cross into that region through Ukhiya-Teknaf border with Burma. In no time the influx that started with a few hundred swelled into several thousand. The fleeing families complained of evictions from their homes in the Arakan by the military, loot, rape and murder. Our border guards could not turn families with women and small children away. So the tide began with thousands spilling into the country with their belongings -- clothes, utensils and domestic animals.

We neither had the means nor the logistics to handle such a massive flow of people from across the border. What we did however was to stop the human traffic going deeper into the district.

Photo: SHUDEEPTO ARIQUZZAMAN

The police and the border guards restricted their movement further into the district, but we had to make some impromptu shelters with materials that were locally available -- largely tarpaulins. This was augmented with some relief materials available in the district warehouses. However, soon it became apparent to us that with the never-ending tide of human crossings our local efforts would be mere drops of water in a sea. The central authorities were notified, and in a matter of weeks, the whole incident became a scene of human misery on a grand scale that would need international support.

We would end up finally with over 200,000 of the refugees in that influx who we were able to contain in 13 camps -- spread along much of the 117 mile long land border with Burma (Myanmar). Relief came from international organisations as well as foreign NGOs. The government amassed an army of civil servants and law-enforcing agents to administer relief and security of the refugees. Along with that the government also mounted parallel efforts to repatriate the refugees back to their homes in the Arakan. This involved opening dialogue with the Burmese authorities and engaging with them patiently for a solution of the problems.

The root of the problem in repatriation of the refugees was their identity. Who were the Rohingyas? Although Muslims have lived in the Arakan province of Burma since the 13th century with the arrivals of Arab traders in the Arakan/Bengal coast, the Rohingyas were relatively recent settlers. They were ethnically Bengalis from Chittagong region who had migrated to the Arakan over many decades in search of work and had settled there. They were different from the Arakanese in that they were Muslim, spoke Chittagonian dialect (with some variation), and followed the culture of the land they had migrated from. The local Arakanese, who are called Rakhines, and Buddhist by religion, used the migrants as farm workers, and over time allowed them to settle in groups in the villages. More recent migrants maintained links with their extended families in Cox's Bazar region and frequently travelled between two territories. The Burmese treated the Rohingya people differently, terming them as foreigners and sometimes as illegal immigrants.

The crisis of 1978 began when the Burmese government undertook a major campaign against the Rakhine opposition groups, particularly the Arakan Communist Party, the Arakan Independence Organization and the Arakan National Liberation Front, as well as the Rohingya guerrillas, then referred to as the mujahidin. This was followed by a major military operation in Arakan called "King Dragon". People in small villages were uprooted and concentrated in fenced stockades. The result was that we had over 200,000 of the so called Rohingyas in our hands, and we had no way to settle them in our already overpopulated lands.

In dealing with the crisis, we focused on three aspects: (a) confining the refugees in designated camps and keeping them under strict security to prevent their melting away into the neighbouring villages; (b) ensuring food, shelter and medicine in the camps enough for survival; and (c) arranging the repatriation of the refugees with the Burmese authorities without internationalising the issue. But these were not easy tasks.

Photo: SHUDEEPTO ARIQUZZAMAN

The Burmese initially denied any responsibility for the refugees as in their eyes they were illegal immigrants into Arakan and therefore, could not be taken back. We in Bangladesh on the other hand insisted that the refugees were Burmese citizens from Arakan state who had been forcibly thrown out. The Burmese initially balked at any wholesale repatriation, insisting on taking only "genuine" citizens back. But with hardly any documentation with any of the refugees except "ration cards" the Burmese realised it would be difficult for them to separate the "legal" from the "illegal". The situation was further complicated with ongoing strife of the authorities with other insurgents in other parts of Burma.

With some astute diplomacy, and umpteen numbers of meetings between the two governments with officials at different levels spread over several months, we agreed on a repatriation schedule in July 1978. But implementation of the agreement was made difficult, not by the Burmese, but by the refugees by raising fears of renewed persecution once repatriated. This was further exacerbated by the activists of the so-called Rohingya Liberation Front and similar Guerilla outfits who insisted that the refugees not be repatriated until the land was secure from their perspective. (These entities had been fighting for a Rohingya Land in the Arakan with financial support from some foreign elements.) The United Nations High Commission for Refugees, which had become involved in the relief operation, also stipulated that there be no involuntary repatriation.

However, despite these obstacles and resistances, we were able to begin the repatriation in early 1979.

I myself escorted the first batch of refugees across Gundum border to Burma after foiling an attempt by some refugees to stop the repatriation. This first success opened up the road for an uninterrupted repatriation for the rest of the refugees. By mid-1979, well over half of the refugees had returned to Burma and by the end of the year, nearly all had gone back. .

Unfortunately, the tide would turn again a decade later, and we were back to square one. We would again have an influx of over 250,000 Rohingyas crowding our borders along Cox's Bazar-Teknaf corridor citing the same complaints of forced labour, land confiscation, religious intolerance, rape and other forms of persecution by the Myanmar military regime. The difference between the crisis of 1991 and the one 10 years before was that we were able to solve our 1978 problem tactfully within a year, but we are still struggling with the subsequent adversity even to this day. Officially we have been able to repatriate to Myanmar nearly 200,000 over the last several years, but we still have a large number staying back as unregistered refugees, some in camps, but the majority in squatter camps in the border villages. Why, because they refuse to be repatriated. They refuse to go back expressing apprehension of persecution in the land they left behind. But this is only for the registered refugees who are only a small percent of the whole. The uncounted thousands are difficult to identify, and they will not leave.

How do we deal with this problem? We can neither absorb this surplus population in our crowded land, nor can we get rid of them. On the one hand Bangladesh has acceded to several of the existing international rights Covenants and Conventions, and we have provisions within our Constitution that uphold the rights and duties within the UN Charter and further safeguard the legal protection of non-citizens within our territory. As a result we recognise a body of international law which provides the framework for protecting refugees. We cannot therefore forcibly repatriate any refugee to a land where they apprehend persecution of any kind. On the other hand we have the terrible reality of overcrowding our already crumbling infrastructure and physical facilities to take care of this burgeoning Rohingya population. We have done what we could in official repatriation of some of them, but they keep on coming back. Since the refugees are ethnically and linguistically similar to the local population it is difficult to identify them as foreigners unless they are pointed out by the locals.

We have few options, but what I do know is that we have to stop this unending saga of Rohingya migration in our eastern border. We have to realise that there are elements across the border who would like to keep the issue alive for their own goals of having a separate land for their kind. Neither economically nor diplomatically are we in a position to support such "goals" of people, however lofty they may be without jeopardising our existence. Refugees should be registered in squatter camps and villages, with help of local Unions. We also need a close watch on some religion-based non-government organisations that have sprouted in the area who lend their support to the Rohingya activists, and provide incentives to the Rohingyas for migration. We need also to keep on engaging in continuous dialogue with the Burmese authorities to prevent recurrence of happenings that force the Rohingyas to emigrate. I cannot vouch that these will actually solve all our problems in the eastern border, but at least these are worth considering since the Rohingya problem is a ticking time bomb.

Ziauddin Choudhury is a former civil servant in Bangladesh, who now works for an international organisation in USA

http://www.thedailystar.net/forum/2011/August/curious.htm

__._,_.___

[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] Re: Faruk Khan's success...

Eat less

Commerce minister gives solution to price hike of essentials

Amid rising prices of essentials and adulteration of food, Commerce Minister Faruk Khan has come up with a solution: "Eat less".

According to him, if people cut their food consumption, the prices will automatically decline.

"If we can tame our gluttony, traders will find no profit in this business. They will be bound to lower the prices," said the minister at a discussion on adulteration in foodstuff.

When people expect effective measures from the government to check price hike and adulteration, Faruk Khan told consumers, "You might get hurt. But as I personally practice, I would suggest you eat less. Everything will be all right."

Voluntary Consumers Training and Awareness Society, a non-profit organisation, arranged the event at Jatiya Press Club in the capital.

http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=197296

On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 1:40 AM, Isha Khan <bdmailer@gmail.com> wrote:

http://www.prothom-alo.com/detail/date/2011-08-04/news/175486
http://www.prothom-alo.com/detail/date/2011-08-04/news/175487
http://www.prothom-alo.com/detail/date/2011-08-04/news/175488


http://amardeshonline.com/pages/details/2011/08/03/96939

On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Isha Khan <bdmailer@gmail.com> wrote:

Faruk Khan's success...


http://www.dailykalerkantho.com/?view=details&type=gold&data=Loan&pub_no=599&cat_id=1&menu_id=13&news_type_id=1&index=3

http://jugantor.us/enews/issue/2011/08/01/news0536.htm

http://amardeshonline.com/pages/details/2011/08/01/96490

__._,_.___

[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] FW: Somalia is Dying

 

---

Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 12:26:39 -0400
From: avaaz@avaaz.org
Subject: Somalia is Dying
To: farida_majid@hotmail.com

Dear friends,

More than 2000 people are dying every day in Somalia, in a famine that threatens to starve more than eleven million people to death. Conflict between Somalia's Al-Shabaab regime and world leaders has kept out aid that could end the famine. But a few key countries have the power to broker a deal to stop the suffering. Sign the urgent petition for a humanitarian truce and forward to everyone:

Right now, more than 2000 people are dying every day in Somalia, in a famine that threatens to starve eleven million people to death. Drought has brought this region to its knees, but the food crisis is really fueled by a complete breakdown in governance and international diplomacy, and we can put an end to it.

The famine-hit area is governed by Al-Shabaab, an Islamist regime that is linked to terrorist groups. The isolation and conflict between Al-Shabaab, other local leaders, and the international community has kept out much of the aid and trade that could end the famine. But a few key countries, including the United Arab Emirates, still trade with Al-Shabaab -- they have an opportunity to broker a deal with the regime and break the stalemate that threatens the survival of millions.

We cannot let the politics of the war on terror claim any more innocent lives. It's time for the international community and Al-Shabaab to come to an agreement to immediately get food to the suffering Somali people. The UN Security Council is meeting in a few days -- let's demand that they take immediate action to support key Arab nations in an effort to open talks with Al-Shabaab on cooperating to end the famine and seize this chance for a long-term political solution:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/somalia_stop_the_famine_unsc/?vl

Somalia's government was destroyed in 2006 by a US-backed invasion which feared Islamic extremism. But the tactic backfired. Since then, even more radical groups like Al-Shabaab took over and brutalized most of Somalia, and the international community has propped up a corrupt government whose control is limited to parts of the capital. The policies of isolation, invasion and pressure in the war on terror have not helped anyone, and now thousands of Somalis are dying every day. It's time for a new approach.

The US has already stepped up to tackle the crisis, relaxing anti-terrorism laws that blocked aid from reaching the Somali people in Al-Shabaab's region. Meanwhile, there are growing cracks within insurgent groups, and some leaders are willing to let aid in. But it is not enough to break the wall that surrounds those hardest hit by famine. Only bold international diplomacy can engage with all key parties to ensure that relief safely reaches the hundreds of thousands of desperate families.

One of Al-Shabaab's largest sources of income comes from cutting down acacia trees for charcoal, which they illegally export primarily to the United Arab Emirates and other Gulf countries. These nations could now leverage their economic ties to Al-Shabaab to play a crucial diplomatic role and guarantee humanitarian access to famine-stricken areas.

We urgently need a new direction for Somalia -- let's appeal to the UN Security Council to support key Gulf countries to lead mediation efforts to ensure that Somalis dying behind Al-Shabaab's lines are able to access life-saving food and health care for themselves and their starving children. Sign now and forward widely:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/somalia_stop_the_famine_unsc/?vl

Together, Avaaz members have ensured crucial aid was delivered in Burma, Haiti and Pakistan after natural disasters, saving thousands of lives. Now, as the world watches heartbreaking images of dying children in shock and horror, we can urge key countries to show the leadership the Somali people urgently need -- let's stand together now and help end the tragedy in Somalia.

With hope and determination,

Luis, Stephanie, Maria Paz, Emma, Ricken, Giulia, Iain and the whole Avaaz team

SOURCES

Somalia (New York Times)
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/somalia/index.html

Famine weakens and divides Al-Shabaab militants (France24)
http://www.france24.com/en/20110729-somalia-al-shabaab-famine-weakens-divides-qaeda-linked-militants

A famine in Somalia, and a chronic political failure on humanitarian aid (Washington Post)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-leadership/a-famine-in-somalia-and-a-chronic-political-failure-on-humanitarian-aid/2011/08/03/gIQAPaOgrI_story.html

US urges global action on Horn of Africa famine (AFP)
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gWVkYmwIZGd2Jr-3vp5rKF1blTbg?docId=CNG.0dcc70d787af82f2b283aeb2af9d940e.b31

Horn of Africa: From one drought to another (The Guardian)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jul/07/horn-of-africa-drought

Somalia: Focus on the Charcoal Trade (SomaliaWatch.org)
http://www.somaliawatch.org/archiveoct00/001026601.htm

Support the Avaaz Community!
We're entirely funded by donations and receive no money from governments or corporations. Our dedicated team ensures even the smallest contributions go a long way.

---

Avaaz.org is a 9-million-person global campaign network that works to ensure that the views and values of the world's people shape global decision-making. ("Avaaz" means "voice" or "song" in many languages.) Avaaz members live in every nation of the world; our team is spread across 13 countries on 4 continents and operates in 14 languages. Learn about some of Avaaz's biggest campaigns here, or follow us on Facebook or Twitter.

This message was sent to farida_majid@hotmail.com. To change your email address, language, or other information, contact us via this form. To unsubscribe, send an email to unsubscribe@avaaz.org or click here.

To contact Avaaz, please do not reply to this email. Instead, write to us at www.avaaz.org/en/contact or call us at +1-888-922-8229 (US).

__._,_.___

[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] FW: [Secular Perspective] Problems of Pluralism

 

---

Subject: [Secular Perspective] Problems of Pluralism
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 14:53:50 +0530

 

PROBLEMS OF PLURALISM

 

Asghar Ali Engineer

 

(Islam and Modern Age, August 2011)

 

When Islam emerged on the scene in early seventh century, Arabs were divided among different tribes but nevertheless spoke one language Arabic and more or less followed one religion (though had different traditions) i.e. worshipping different idols placed inside Ka'ba and some idols which were outside Mecca. Thus we cannot call that society a pluralist society. Of course there were Jews in Madina and Christians in some parts of Arabian Peninsula. So in that way it was a multi-religious society to an extent as Christians and Jews were in small minorities.

 

We do not know about any religious conflict between pagan-Arabs and Jews and Christians. Though Judaism and Christianity were organized religions and Arabs had none, pagan Arabs were wary of accepting these religions for fear of political consequences. They thought Christianity is official religion of Roman Empire and converting to it may subjugate them to Roman Empire and they may lose their independence. Also, some Arabs in the border area who embraced Christianity were far from happy and they faced persecution from Roman Empire. Later they embraced Islam as mainly religion of the Arabs.

 

Despite all this Qur'an did not reject religious pluralism. It not only accepted religious but also linguistic and ethnic pluralism as well. There are verses in the Qur'an to this effect two of which I would like to quote here:

 

1)      "For every one of you we appointed a law and a way. And if Allah had pleased He would have made you a single people, but that He might try you in what He gave you. So vie one with another in virtuous deeds. To Allah you will all return, so He will inform you of that wherein you differed…(5:48)

 

2)      And of His signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth and the diversity of your tongues and colours (ethnic diversity). Surely there are signs in this for the learned. (30:22).

 

Both the verses quoted above not only accepted diversity of religions, languages and ethnicities but describe them as sign of Allah. Thus Allah has created pluralism and it must be respected. If Allah so desired He could have created all of us one people with one religion, one tongue and one colour. But Allah did not do so and instead created diversity of every kind and made it a test for us whether we can live in harmony despite these diversities and, instead of making it a source of conflict, as it often happens, we should make it a source of excelling each other in good deeds.

 

The Arabs were very proud of their language and ethnic origin and hence Qur'an emphasized that there is no need for taking pride in ones language and Arabness as Allah has created other languages and ethnic groups and all need to be respected as none is superior to the other and all are Allah's creation and Allah's signs.

 

Thus believers were taught to respect other faiths, languages and ethnicities what could be described as most contemporary or modern attitude. Qur'an also told believers not to abuse others gods lest they should abuse Allah without knowledge. The Qur'an went one step further and maintained that to every people their own faith appears to be fair and good and so one should see others faith in their perspective and not ones own faith perspective. (See later part of 30:22)

 

But in this world people don't behave according to their scriptures, be they Muslims or people of other faiths. They behave more according to their own interests and benefits. The Arabs continued to feel superior over non-Arabs including non-Arab Muslims. It always remained a challenge to unite Arab and non-Arab Muslims. Arabs looked down upon Muslims of inferior variety and considered Arabs as better Muslims. 

 

Islam appeared among Arabs but soon spread too many parts of the world and various local cultures and traditions of non-Arab societies began to reflect in local Muslim communities. Thus Islam did not remain monolithic as many theologians continued to assert. When local cultures became integral part of various local Muslim communities and thus now instead of Islam there were Islams with differing practices.

 

Theologically and legally too Islam split into several different sects and legal schools. Political splits also acquired theological hues. To begin with succession to the Prophet (PBUH) was a political question but soon it became theological and Shi'ah Islam acquired its own separate theology and Sunni Islam its own. Both became irreconcilable and ethnically too they were embraced by different ethnic groups.

 

Though there are several Arab countries like Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and Bahrain having Shi'ah population either in majority or minority, Shi'ah Islam was mainly embraced by Iranians, a non-Arab Persian speaking people who had sense of superior culture and civilization heritage. Similarly different tribes in Central Asia embraced Islam with their own customs and traditions which remain their hallmark.

 

Islam thus became bewilderingly diverse internally. In Africa Hausa Islam is so radically different from 'mainstream' Arab Islam that many Muslims would not even recognize them as Muslims. Hausa Muslims were depicted during festival of Islam celebrations in late seventies, some Pakistanis watching the Hausa Islam exhibition remarked how these people can be described as Muslims?

 

Ethnic and tribal prejudices come into play in all such matters. Nevertheless all of them feel they are true Muslims. Then there are among Shi'ah and Sunni Islam several different sects with substantially differing theologies. In Lebanon we have Druze Muslims and Ismaili Muslims who considerably differ from 'mainstream' Shi'ah Islam. Among Ismailis there are Agakhanis and Bohras who differ from each other considerably in theological issues.

 

In fact if we see Baghdadi's book Al-Farq bayn al-Firaq in first century of Islam he counts more than 100 different sects all claiming to be representing 'true Islam'. While many sects came into existence due to political differences, some came into existence due to theological differences too. If one goes by Qur'anic pluralism one must accept both internal pluralism as well as external pluralism i.e. coexistence between Islam and non-Islamic religions.

     

However, let alone coexistence between Islam and other religions, there have been serious conflict between different sects of Islam. Today Sunni terrorists are continuously attacking and killing Shi'ah Muslims in Pakistan, Iraq and elsewhere. Similarly there is serious conflict in Indian sub-continent between Wahabis and Barelvis. Also Ahmadiyas are denounced as non-believers. In fact each sect condemns the other as non-believer (kafir). The word kafir is used quite irresponsibly.

 

Perhaps a Muslim can co-exist more peacefully with non-Muslims than with Muslims of other sects. Justice Munir who inquired into anti-Qadiyani riots in Punjab in Pakistan in early fifties writes in his report that he examined all leading theologians of Muslims in Pakistan but no two of them agreed on definition of a Muslim and yet all of them agreed one who is not a Muslim should be killed.

 

Thus despite Quranic doctrine of religious and cultural pluralism, in practice, Muslim theologians have not accepted it in practice. In one conference in Iran on pluralism one of the leading Ayatollah said that Islam cannot accept pluralism as it means all religions are equally valid. This cannot be accepted. I stood up and said sir, this is not Qur'anic approach. And one realizes importance of pluralism only when one lives in minority. The Ayatollah then said I do not mean that pluralism should not be accepted but that equal validity of all religions cannot be accepted. I said for this Qur'an clearly says in 5:48 that it is Allah who will decide, not human beings like us. We human beings should only try to excel each other in virtuous deeds instead of judging who is right and who is wrong.

 

While theologians challenge each other and create conflictual situations, the Sufis, especially of wahdat al-wujud (Unity of Being) philosophy accept religious and cultural pluralism as according to their philosophy Allah is manifest in every human being and everything. Thus they have no problem with equal validity of all religions. Also, they accepted local languages and local traditions without any hesitation.

 

While theologians always strived for 'Islamic purity' Sufis gave great importance to cultural assimilation. That is why Muslim masses had great respect for Sufi saints and flocked to them and to their tombs after their death and hardly even knew much about theologians, let alone flocking to them or their tombs. Sufi Islam has tremendous popularity even today as, through cultural assimilation, they won the hearts of local masses.

 

It is also important to note that pluralism and diversity enriches our life and its absence makes our language and culture quite colorless. When a religion is followed by millions and peoples of various cultures, languages, customs and traditions, its understanding and interpretation cannot remain monolithic. Had Islam remained confined to Arabia, perhaps it could have remained monolithic but after it spread in different parts of the world it embraced local philosophies and different traditions. Needless to say different cultural traditions greatly influence our understanding of religion which has originated elsewhere.

 

Arabia had no rich philosophical and cultural traditions before Islam. There were no written traditions either. Like in tribal culture emphasis was on oral rather than written traditions. Qur'an was the first written text and its language, spirituality and philosophical depth was unique. Its simple but profound spirituality and philosophical depth was nothing short of miracle that too from someone who could not read and write.

 

However, Arabs due to their monolithic and simple folk traditions, could not fully appreciate philosophical and spiritual richness of Qur'an. It was understood more linguistically than philosophically and spiritually. However, when it spread to other civilizations like those of Iran and India, it began to acquire richness, complexity and profundity. But it came at a cost i.e. diversity.

 

Also, Islam had become universal religion for Arabs right in the first decade after the death of the Prophet (PBUH). And by the end of first century hijrah it had spread to large parts of Asia and Africa and some parts of Europe. In these countries it was not only internal diversity that it had to cope also with external diversity i.e. it had to co-exist with other religious traditions. Thus now Islam had to face challenge from within and challenge from without.

 

Challenge from within was no small challenge and now challenge from without made things more complex. And it was not mere coexistence but also with competition for power. And from unique historical situation in Arabia theologians developed a doctrine that in Islam religion and political power go hand in hand. In fact this doctrine cannot be supported from any Qur'anic text but it was result of total power vacuum in Arabia. When Islam became universal religion Muslims also became rulers there being no ruling monarchy or any other form of political power before Islam.

 

Now equipped with this theological doctrine Muslims began to aspire for political power and came into clash with the Christian rulers in several countries which were under Roman Empire or non-Christian power of Persia. This clash of political power also was seen as clash of religions. In fact Qur'anic teachings have no place for clash of religions. The two great religious traditions in the area i.e. Judaism and Christianity were accepted as religions brought by Allah's Prophets and Muslims were allowed to marry women of the people of the book i.e. Jews and Christians. This also shows clearly that there was no clash of religions at all and Qur'an had accepted religious pluralism.

 

It is also well-known fact of history that Islamic regimes never persecuted Jews and Christians and many Jews and Christians held high administrative offices under Abbasid, Fatimid and other Islamic empires. But elsewhere competition for power also brought about clashes. Especially with Christians. With Jews there were no such clashes as Jews had no political empire of their own.

 

Jews enjoyed full religious freedom throughout the Middle East and coexisted in peace until 1948 when Israel was created in Palestine area. This itself shows clash with Jews is not religious in nature but political. Palestine issue has become a sore point in modern Islamic history. The USA-Arab relation does not have a different story. What has been called clash of civilization by US Harward scholar Prof. Huntington is not clash of civilization but it is clash of interests.

 

Muslims do not hate USA but resent its unqualified support to Israel and suppressing the rights of Palestinians, throwing them out of their homes and hearths and continues to do that. Thus it is not, as media projects, fight between Christianity and Islam but a fight between oppressors and oppressed. US also has selective approach towards Arabs. Wherever it has installed or supports monarchs, dictators and sheikhs, considers them friends and has best of relations with Saudis, Kuwait, Qatar and other Gulf regimes. Interestingly among dictators also it hates those who do not fall in US lines like Saddam Husain, Asad of Syria. It is also at odds with Iranian regime but until yesterday it had very friendly relations with Shah.

 

It is not religious pluralism which is a problem, it is clash of interests which at times, but not always, which results from religious pluralism which becomes a problem. Thus problem of religious pluralism has to be understood in its proper perspective. Also, with changing situation nature of religious pluralism changes. Today there seems to be great solidarity between Western Christians and Jews. In medieval ages Jews were hated and there were pogroms against them. And Hitler in Christian Germany killed them in millions. Today entire west stands by not Jews but Zionists in suppressing Palestinians. Thus perception of problem of plurality changes with change in situation.

 

There are no permanent friends and permanent enemies. Power has its own logic. Obama who had extended his hand of friendship towards world of Islam and Muslims welcomes his election to the August post of President of USA, is changing his plan of action towards Islamic world and his hand of friendship seems to be in withdrawal mode.

 

Religious pluralism by itself is most enriching and must be consolidated. No part of the globalized world can ever be mono-religious or mono-cultural. At one time America took pride in its melting pot model of identity as all those who came to America were protestant Christians from Europe (most of whom were victims of religious persecution at the hands of Catholic Church). This model remained valid only when migrants were Protestant Christians came from Europe.

 

However, it is no more so. In post World War II migrants began to come from post-colonial countries of Asia and Africa and they refused to merge their identities with those of Americans and melting pot became irrelevant and has been replaced by mosaic model and all migrants from non-European countries and non-Christians describe themselves with their original identities i.e. African American, Arab Americans, Indian Americans and so on.

 

Mosaic model is much closer to the spirit of pluralism. Thus problems of pluralism can be resolved only in democratic spirit and justice to all religious groups coexisting together. This in today's world democracy, diversity and dialogue become extremely crucial for peaceful coexistence. But regrettably even in 21^st century our world is bereft of these ideals and values.

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

Institute of Islamic Studies

Mumbai.

e-mail: csss@mtnl.net.in

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Secularperspective" group.
To post to this group, send email to secularperspective@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to secularperspective+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/secularperspective?hl=en.

__._,_.___

[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [ALOCHONA] FM says no info on Tipaimukh dam construction

Our PM and FM should have a meaning discussion on this dam issue. After Farakka, we realized we cannot trust India to give us fair share of water. We need to have a mechanism to ensure our share of water otherwise this country will face serious food shortage in near future.

-----Original Message-----
From: Isha Khan <bdmailer@gmail.com>
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
Sent: Wed, Aug 3, 2011 3:18 pm
Subject: [ALOCHONA] FM says no info on Tipaimukh dam construction

 

FM says no info on Tipaimukh dam construction

The government has no information that the Indian government starts building a dam on the common river Barak at Tipaimukh, foreign minister Dipu Moni said Monday.

The dam in the Indian province of Monipur would have severe consequences in lower riparian Bangladesh, water experts said.According to Indian media reports construction of the Tipaimukh Damk would start in weeks.

Dipu Moni, however, said that the two governments would sign transit agreements during Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh's visit to Dhaka in September.Asked about India's decision to build the controversial dam above Bangladesh, she said, 'The Indian prime minister assured our prime minister that India will not do anything harmful for Bangladesh.'

'We have no information that they have done anything moving away from that position,' she told a news conference when her attention was drawn to a news according to which the government of India gave approval to build the Tipaimukh dam. 

Asked about the Awami League led government's position on providing transit to India, the foreign minister said, 'discussions are going on. I am hopeful that we will be able to sign several transit protocols during the Indian prime minister's visit.'

Singh is scheduled to pay a two-day official visit to Dhaka beginning September 6.'We have taken a political decision to provide the transit,' she said during prime minister's Sheikh Hasina's visit Delhi in January, 2010.She said, 'Now the matter is at implementation phase.'

She said that the two countries 'are discussing' the issue of determining fees and the use of infrastructure.'It's a long process. Nothing will happen overnight,' said Dipu Moni.She said that the Bangladesh government would also examine deals signed by other countries on providing transit with same characteristics.She said that the government was working on providing transit to India, Nepal and Bhutan under a broad framework.

India is about start the construction of the Tipaimukh Dam, United News of Bangladesh reported last week quoting a top official of Nipko, an affiliated company of the Indian Power Ministry, which had been entrusted to implement the hydroelectric project on the common international river Barak.

The official said Nipko obtained environmental clearance and received the go-ahead from the Indian central government to build the dam at Tipaimukh in Churachandpur district in the northeastern Indian province of Monipur.He also said that on receiving the go-head the company already took the necessary preparations to start the dam construction on the Barak at Tipaimukh.

Barak feeds two rivers in Bangladesh— the 350-kilometer long Surma and 110-km long Kushiara, the lifeline of the country's north-eastern region.India would also build a barrage on the Barak at Fuletal in Lakhipur in Assam below the Tipaimukh Dam to divert its waters for an irrigation project, Nipko said.

The Nipko official said that the machinery and equipment for the construction were being transported to Tipaimukh and the construction engineers, technicians and workers were gathering at the site.The news that the government of India was preparing to start the construction of the Tipaimukh Dam  defying protests by the people of Bangladesh and India's north-eastern region heightened worries in the region.

The Indian project to divert Barak waters at the upstream would, in the dry months, dry up Surma and Kushiara, which feeds the Megna, a major river system in Bangladesh, would adversely affect lower riparian Bangladesh in several ways, water experts said.But in the rainy season the release of extra flows by India would aggravate flooding and erosion in Bangladesh, particularly in greater Sylhet.

The problems in lower riparian Bangladesh would increase manifold due to Tipaimukh Dam, water, environment and agriculture experts warned.Water and agriculture experts said Tipaimukh would create severe water shortage in Bangladesh's north-eastern region and turn a vast arable area into arid land to threaten the country's food security and farmers' livelihood.

Farmers in Sylhet, Moulvibazaar, Sunamganj, Kishoreganj and Brahmanbaria are worried that griculture and fishing, which provide them sustenance, would be destroyed by the Indian dam.

http://newagebd.com/newspaper1/frontpage/26751.html

http://amardeshonline.com/pages/details/2011/07/19/93615

__._,_.___

[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___