The Millenium Manifesto or ’Ikeesween Sadi Dastoor’
Zeemax January 8, 2000
#332 Posted by sarwar on January 2, 2001 10:08:07 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#331 Posted by mohajir on April 6, 2000 11:13:28 pm
Amanullah Khan, chief of Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front believes that the divided
Jammu and Kashmir should be reunited (Indian administered and Pakistan administered)
in several peaceful phases and made a fully independent State for, say 15 years, with
a democratic, non-communal and federal system of government. That government should have friendly relations with both India and Pakistan. The international community should give an undertaking that none of the neighbouring states will interfere in the internal affairs of the new state or violate its frontiers. Similarly, the new state of J&K should ensure its neutrality and not allow its soil to be used against any country. After 15 years the UN can ask Kashmiris if they want to remain independent or become a part of India or Pakistan. Every party should then accept the popular decision of a referendum. A UN peace and monitoring force can ensure the fairness of such an exercise.
``In my view, both India and Pakistan have to choose between the status quo and independence to a re-united Jammu and Kashmir. For India, the status quo will mean continued trouble in Kashmir as is happening right now. On the other hand, re-unification of an independent J&K can go a long way in developing friendly relations between India and Pakistan, with Kashmir acting as a bridge. This is the only solution for a peaceful and prosperous future for the region.
Pakistan has already missed a number of chances. In 1948, India`s deputy prime minister, Sardar Patel offered the entire region of J&K to Pakistan. His condition was that Pakistan should abandon its claim on Junagadh and stop supporting the demand of complete independence then being made by the Nizam (the ruler) of Hyderabad State in Central India. Pakistan rejected the offer with the result that it lost almost all the three states. Today, every Pakistani repents missing that chance. Here is yet another chance for Pakistan.
A friendly, independent Jammu Kashmir will be far more beneficial to Pakistan than the status quo. After some time even this chance may not be available to her. By parroting the demand for implementation of UN resolutions, which deny to Kashmiris their right to independence and may never come to pass, Pakistan is bent upon committing another folly. And after Clinton`s visit, Pakistan should do some soul-searching and try to understand the dynamics that are now driving international politics.``
Jammu and Kashmir should be reunited (Indian administered and Pakistan administered)
in several peaceful phases and made a fully independent State for, say 15 years, with
a democratic, non-communal and federal system of government. That government should have friendly relations with both India and Pakistan. The international community should give an undertaking that none of the neighbouring states will interfere in the internal affairs of the new state or violate its frontiers. Similarly, the new state of J&K should ensure its neutrality and not allow its soil to be used against any country. After 15 years the UN can ask Kashmiris if they want to remain independent or become a part of India or Pakistan. Every party should then accept the popular decision of a referendum. A UN peace and monitoring force can ensure the fairness of such an exercise.
``In my view, both India and Pakistan have to choose between the status quo and independence to a re-united Jammu and Kashmir. For India, the status quo will mean continued trouble in Kashmir as is happening right now. On the other hand, re-unification of an independent J&K can go a long way in developing friendly relations between India and Pakistan, with Kashmir acting as a bridge. This is the only solution for a peaceful and prosperous future for the region.
Pakistan has already missed a number of chances. In 1948, India`s deputy prime minister, Sardar Patel offered the entire region of J&K to Pakistan. His condition was that Pakistan should abandon its claim on Junagadh and stop supporting the demand of complete independence then being made by the Nizam (the ruler) of Hyderabad State in Central India. Pakistan rejected the offer with the result that it lost almost all the three states. Today, every Pakistani repents missing that chance. Here is yet another chance for Pakistan.
A friendly, independent Jammu Kashmir will be far more beneficial to Pakistan than the status quo. After some time even this chance may not be available to her. By parroting the demand for implementation of UN resolutions, which deny to Kashmiris their right to independence and may never come to pass, Pakistan is bent upon committing another folly. And after Clinton`s visit, Pakistan should do some soul-searching and try to understand the dynamics that are now driving international politics.``
#330 Posted by mohajir on April 4, 2000 7:29:08 pm
http://www.atimes.com/ind-pak/BD05Df01.html
Hindu minority refuses to bow out of Kashmir
By Sonia Jabbar
NEW DELHI - Adding to the complexity of the ``Kashmir Problem`` which has dogged India and Pakistan for more than 50 years has been the fate of the minority Hindu population of Kashmir, otherwise known as the Pandits.
If little is known about the 300,000 Pandits who fled the Kashmir Valley between 1989 and 1991, at a time of popular support for militancy, to become refugees in India, less is known about the tiny number of 17,860 Pandits who chose not to leave.
Unlike the Kashmiri Sikhs who rallied around in huge numbers after the massacre of the 36 Sikhs of Chittisinghpora earlier in March, the Pandits were unable to organize themselves effectively in the face of selective killings of their community, choosing the safety of tented refugee camps in Jammu and Delhi instead.
The mass exodus of the Pandits is still shrouded in mystery. Why they left is a question still levelled at them by the Muslims of the valley.
``Tens of thousands of Kashmiri Muslims have died either at the hands of security forces or militants, but we are still here,`` says Shafi, an artist in Anantnag whose group of friends was almost entirely Pandit before the exodus. That there was a real, palpable fear among the Pandits of being exterminated is a fact dismissed by Shafi. He feels, like most Muslims, betrayed by them. They left without saying goodbye.
In Delhi, an old man`s sense of betrayal is of equal intensity. He was a government servant in Kashmir who trusted his Muslim neighbors. He feels they gave him no choice once the killings of the Pandits started in 1989, that they did nothing to allay his fears, that they drove him out of his homeland. ``I asked my Muslim friend why did you throw us out, why? Did we murder you? Did we rob you? Did we rape your women?`` he shouted, ``we taught you to read and write, we taught you . . . `` His friend, he said, had no answer.
The Pandits of Kashmir are all Brahmins, and pride themselves on being the only caste to have resisted conversion when Islam was introduced peacefully to the Kashmir Valley in the 14th century by the Sufis of Central Asia. They held considerable power, as they were the only people who had a tradition of being highly educated. But this also meant that they bore the brunt of the tyranny unleashed by certain ruthless invaders, particularly during the Afghan occupation of Kashmir in the mid-eighteenth century.
Even though the Kashmiri Pandits have had greater sympathies and links with the Indian Union than their Muslim counterparts, they bore severe economic losses after the Maharaja of Kashmir acceded to India when, in 1949, Kashmir`s leader Sheikh Abdullah introduced land reform measures, redistributing land largely held by the Pandits to the Muslim tiller.
``We have suffered at the hands of tyrants through history,`` says Yuvraj Raina, a Panun Kashmir activist in New Delhi. ``There have been four migrations of Pandits. This is the fifth, and the last.`` Panun Kashmir is an organization of Kashmiri Pandits formed in 1991 which believes that the only solution to the problems faced by Kashmiri Pandits is a separate homeland carved non-violently out of the Kashmir Valley.
This portion of the Valley, called Panun Kashmir, would be a secular state autonomous of Srinagar, and would abide by the Indian Constitution. They feel this is the only way to safeguard the interests, values and culture of the Kashmiri Pandit.
``Look, we told those who remained behind, it`s just a matter of time before they get you,`` says Raina. ``The Muslim fundamentalists want to ensure a pan-Islamic State from the Middle East and Central Asia to Kashmir and the world keeps quiet.`` He recounts the recent killings of the Pandits in the Valley - five last month, one more a couple of weeks later. ``We told them it is either homeland or perish.``
But this is not a sentiment shared by the Pandits who choose to remain in the Valley. In Mattan, south Kashmir, a young school teacher, Jyoti, continues to live with her family and extended family amongst her Muslim neighbors. ``This is the only home I`ve known. These are the only friends and neighbors I have ever had and they`ve been very good to us - so why should we leave?`` she asks.
``Yes, we do feel scared sometimes,`` she concedes. ``You see, no one knows anymore who the killers are. It`s not like the old days where everyone knew who belonged to which militant outfit. Now they are nameless, faceless.``
About the Pandit exodus she says, ``We never knew they were leaving. No one told us anything. In the evening they`d be chatting with us quite normally, perhaps a little afraid, and then the next morning we`d find a big lock on their front doors.``
The exodus of the Pandits has also meant that it becomes increasingly difficult for someone like Jyoti to find a suitable husband. In Srinagar there is a sizeable concentration of Pandits, but in rural areas there are barely a few families among the larger Muslim population. ``I really don`t know what I will do. My parents don`t want me to marry into a family who lives in some isolated hamlet. They`d worry for my safety. I suppose they`ll marry me off to someone in Jammu and I`d be forced to leave the Valley,`` she says quietly.
In Srinagar, the Hindu Welfare Forum, founded in 1991 to protect the interests of the Pandits who chose to remain behind, are an angry lot. They are visibly upset by the recent killings of the Pandits and fear another migration. ``Neither the state government nor the government of India has done anything to protect us. Nobody even knows we even exist. Neither the Indian media nor the international media has bothered to see how we live, highlighted our problems. Even our own community in India and abroad calls us traitors because we refused to leave,`` said a Forum member.
Apart from the myriad problems faced by this tiny community, they are a determined lot. Says Wanchoo, a businessman and a member of the Forum: ``We will never leave Kashmir, and we don`t believe in a separate homeland.
``This is our homeland and we wish to live in peace here. As for the killings, well it`s a problem faced by all Kashmiris, not just the Hindus. Everyday you read that 8-10 people have been killed and they`re usually Muslims. But the militants must realize that they only get discredited when they kill the minorities.``
His wife, who has lived through these terrible 12 years, witnessing much of the violence, experiencing much of the pain, relates a recent experience which makes her smile with delight and hope. ``At a wedding recently a whole lot of us had gathered after a long, long time - Muslim women as well as Sikh and Pandit women - and we really had fun, singing and dancing late into the night just as we used to before the militancy started.
``As I was turning in to sleep I heard the Muslim women whispering among themselves in the kitchen. `After so long,` they said, `after so many years all of us have come together`.
``It`s true, isn`t it, that a garden is most beautiful when there is a profusion of many kinds of flowers.``
Hindu minority refuses to bow out of Kashmir
By Sonia Jabbar
NEW DELHI - Adding to the complexity of the ``Kashmir Problem`` which has dogged India and Pakistan for more than 50 years has been the fate of the minority Hindu population of Kashmir, otherwise known as the Pandits.
If little is known about the 300,000 Pandits who fled the Kashmir Valley between 1989 and 1991, at a time of popular support for militancy, to become refugees in India, less is known about the tiny number of 17,860 Pandits who chose not to leave.
Unlike the Kashmiri Sikhs who rallied around in huge numbers after the massacre of the 36 Sikhs of Chittisinghpora earlier in March, the Pandits were unable to organize themselves effectively in the face of selective killings of their community, choosing the safety of tented refugee camps in Jammu and Delhi instead.
The mass exodus of the Pandits is still shrouded in mystery. Why they left is a question still levelled at them by the Muslims of the valley.
``Tens of thousands of Kashmiri Muslims have died either at the hands of security forces or militants, but we are still here,`` says Shafi, an artist in Anantnag whose group of friends was almost entirely Pandit before the exodus. That there was a real, palpable fear among the Pandits of being exterminated is a fact dismissed by Shafi. He feels, like most Muslims, betrayed by them. They left without saying goodbye.
In Delhi, an old man`s sense of betrayal is of equal intensity. He was a government servant in Kashmir who trusted his Muslim neighbors. He feels they gave him no choice once the killings of the Pandits started in 1989, that they did nothing to allay his fears, that they drove him out of his homeland. ``I asked my Muslim friend why did you throw us out, why? Did we murder you? Did we rob you? Did we rape your women?`` he shouted, ``we taught you to read and write, we taught you . . . `` His friend, he said, had no answer.
The Pandits of Kashmir are all Brahmins, and pride themselves on being the only caste to have resisted conversion when Islam was introduced peacefully to the Kashmir Valley in the 14th century by the Sufis of Central Asia. They held considerable power, as they were the only people who had a tradition of being highly educated. But this also meant that they bore the brunt of the tyranny unleashed by certain ruthless invaders, particularly during the Afghan occupation of Kashmir in the mid-eighteenth century.
Even though the Kashmiri Pandits have had greater sympathies and links with the Indian Union than their Muslim counterparts, they bore severe economic losses after the Maharaja of Kashmir acceded to India when, in 1949, Kashmir`s leader Sheikh Abdullah introduced land reform measures, redistributing land largely held by the Pandits to the Muslim tiller.
``We have suffered at the hands of tyrants through history,`` says Yuvraj Raina, a Panun Kashmir activist in New Delhi. ``There have been four migrations of Pandits. This is the fifth, and the last.`` Panun Kashmir is an organization of Kashmiri Pandits formed in 1991 which believes that the only solution to the problems faced by Kashmiri Pandits is a separate homeland carved non-violently out of the Kashmir Valley.
This portion of the Valley, called Panun Kashmir, would be a secular state autonomous of Srinagar, and would abide by the Indian Constitution. They feel this is the only way to safeguard the interests, values and culture of the Kashmiri Pandit.
``Look, we told those who remained behind, it`s just a matter of time before they get you,`` says Raina. ``The Muslim fundamentalists want to ensure a pan-Islamic State from the Middle East and Central Asia to Kashmir and the world keeps quiet.`` He recounts the recent killings of the Pandits in the Valley - five last month, one more a couple of weeks later. ``We told them it is either homeland or perish.``
But this is not a sentiment shared by the Pandits who choose to remain in the Valley. In Mattan, south Kashmir, a young school teacher, Jyoti, continues to live with her family and extended family amongst her Muslim neighbors. ``This is the only home I`ve known. These are the only friends and neighbors I have ever had and they`ve been very good to us - so why should we leave?`` she asks.
``Yes, we do feel scared sometimes,`` she concedes. ``You see, no one knows anymore who the killers are. It`s not like the old days where everyone knew who belonged to which militant outfit. Now they are nameless, faceless.``
About the Pandit exodus she says, ``We never knew they were leaving. No one told us anything. In the evening they`d be chatting with us quite normally, perhaps a little afraid, and then the next morning we`d find a big lock on their front doors.``
The exodus of the Pandits has also meant that it becomes increasingly difficult for someone like Jyoti to find a suitable husband. In Srinagar there is a sizeable concentration of Pandits, but in rural areas there are barely a few families among the larger Muslim population. ``I really don`t know what I will do. My parents don`t want me to marry into a family who lives in some isolated hamlet. They`d worry for my safety. I suppose they`ll marry me off to someone in Jammu and I`d be forced to leave the Valley,`` she says quietly.
In Srinagar, the Hindu Welfare Forum, founded in 1991 to protect the interests of the Pandits who chose to remain behind, are an angry lot. They are visibly upset by the recent killings of the Pandits and fear another migration. ``Neither the state government nor the government of India has done anything to protect us. Nobody even knows we even exist. Neither the Indian media nor the international media has bothered to see how we live, highlighted our problems. Even our own community in India and abroad calls us traitors because we refused to leave,`` said a Forum member.
Apart from the myriad problems faced by this tiny community, they are a determined lot. Says Wanchoo, a businessman and a member of the Forum: ``We will never leave Kashmir, and we don`t believe in a separate homeland.
``This is our homeland and we wish to live in peace here. As for the killings, well it`s a problem faced by all Kashmiris, not just the Hindus. Everyday you read that 8-10 people have been killed and they`re usually Muslims. But the militants must realize that they only get discredited when they kill the minorities.``
His wife, who has lived through these terrible 12 years, witnessing much of the violence, experiencing much of the pain, relates a recent experience which makes her smile with delight and hope. ``At a wedding recently a whole lot of us had gathered after a long, long time - Muslim women as well as Sikh and Pandit women - and we really had fun, singing and dancing late into the night just as we used to before the militancy started.
``As I was turning in to sleep I heard the Muslim women whispering among themselves in the kitchen. `After so long,` they said, `after so many years all of us have come together`.
``It`s true, isn`t it, that a garden is most beautiful when there is a profusion of many kinds of flowers.``
#329 Posted by mohajir on March 30, 2000 4:17:45 pm
Liberating`` Kashmir has become an article of faith for Pakistan`s generals. Clinton can point out to the military regime that the conflict with India is ruining Pakistan`s economy and its international relations. But will a country with its back to the wall listen to economic and political logic?
Almost everyday foreign journalists have being flown by helicopter to the mountainous forward post in Pakistan occupied Kashmir for briefing on Kashmir, but all they want to know is how Pakistan helps Islamic militants infiltrate into India through these hills. Before leaving their briefing, journalists are handed a video and photographs, depicting decapitated civilians, allegedly the handiwork of Indian troops said to have crossed the Line of Control in February.
As the snow melts in the Kashmir valley, Moslem fighters will be taking their Koran and a
Kalashnikov rifle as they slip across the border into India.
``We will continue with our struggle. For us it makes no difference,`` trainee guerrilla Mohammad Hanif Abu Dojana, 21, said about the Clinton visit, as he sat cross-legged in a small office of Mujahideen Lashkar-e-Taiba in the port city of Karachi.
Lashkar says it is the largest Pakistan-based militant group fighting Indian rule in Kashmir,
with offices across the country collecting funds and recruits like Dojana, mostly from poor
neighbourhoods and villages.
Similar groups, like the Lashkar-e-Tayyba, whose membership and leadership include retired members
of Pakistan`s army and Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), are so much a part of the unofficial body politic in Pakistan now that they enjoy open material support from the Musharraf regime. At that group`s annual meeting last November, Lashkar`s chief, Hafiz Muhammad Saeed ranted that ``Issues cannot be solved without introducing the Islamic system. The Jehad is being organized under the leadership of Lashkar-e-Osama [Soldiers of Osama bin Laden].
In this fight, the United States is the biggest terrorist. Its diplomatic missions here patronize us!`` Even more unsettling than the fact that this speech was made exactly one week prior to the attack on the U.S. mission in Islamabad, is that this conference received a permit and security protection from the Pakistani government.
Dojana, sporting a small beard, is among hundreds of recruits who will join Lashkar`s suicide Fidayee groups, which are trained to attack military targets deep inside the disputed Himalayan region, the potential flashpoint of another Indo-Pakistani war.
But to these militants, a clash with India is a ``jihad`` (holy war) -- a chance to achieve what they believe to be the martyrdom they have been taught to prefer over life in this world.
``The Koran teaches us not to trust kafirs (infidels), so why expect anything from Clinton. We should be prepared for jihad; that is where our salvation lies,`` he said.
The militants also voiced confidence in the military-led government of General Pervez Musharraf who toppled prime minister Nawaz Sharif in October, over what Sharif says were differences over the handling of last summer`s confrontation with India in Kashmir.
``Yes, we are confident that the present regime in the present circumstances will not agree to any deal against the mujahideen (holy warriors),`` said Muhammad Yousuf Taiby, rector of the private University of Islamic Studies in Karachi.
Islamabad also supports the Islamic fundamentalist Taliban regime in Afghanistan, which harbours Saudi terrorist Osama bin Laden, the FBI`s Most Wanted.
Many Pakistanis regard bin Laden as a hero for his attacks on US facilities.
Taiby, 45, a graduate from Al-Azhar University in Cairo, made no effort to hide his leanings towards militancy. Most of his graduates end up working directly or indirectly for the guerrillas.
He said Pakistan was of vital strategic importance for what he called ``the world Islamic movement.``
``Pakistan is now the only country in the Moslem world where we can openly propagate and ask people to join in jihad,`` he said, adding that was what the United States was worried about.
Pakistan`s combination of a military Government, nuclear weapons capability, and support for
Muslim extremists in Kashmir, has transformed its image in the West from a somewhat autocratic,
yet moderate Islamic nation, into that of a reckless and unstable country.
Many Pakistanis share such concerns, but welcomed the coup because they thought a military
government might crack down on the Islamic right.
The banners that greeted the President on his drive through a capital turned ghost town by a massive
security operation, graphically illustrated Pakistan`s fatal obsession with Kashmir.
All the way to Islamabad, the pedestrian overpasses sported official banners demanding human rights for the Kashmiris, a mock-up of Pakistan`s nuclear test site and replicas of the medium-range missiles the country has developed, with China`s help.
Reality, in Pakistan, has become surreal, and dangerously so.
Pumped up by state-run broadcast media, the nation of 140 million people is fed an unrelenting diet of distorted and highly emotive propaganda about the plight of their brethren in Kashmir, India`s only
Muslim majority state. Kashmir has become the single most obsession for Pakistan.
On the ground in what the Pakistan Government calls the ``liberated`` area of Kashmir - basically the
part it controls - people displaced by the conflict are used to score points.
At Zaffar camp, they are brought out of their tents to denounce Indian shelling, and deny that armed
Muslim guerrillas regularly cross over to attack Indian forces, and create mayhem of the kind that
struck the Sikh-dominated village of Chattisinghpora, where 36 men were massacred by unidentified gunmen on the eve of Mr Clinton`s visit.
But Pakistan has also broken promises and its protests about injustices increasingly are falling on deaf ears.
In Pakistan, antipathy among ethnic groups and violence between Sunni and Shiite Muslims have been aggravated by economic decay and breathtaking misgovernment. Before he was deposed by the military last year, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif centralized power, undermining Pakistan`s legislature, judiciary and provincial
governments.
Since 1994, the role of native Kashmiris in the insurgency has diminished as heavily armed outsiders from Pakistan and Afghanistan have stepped up the violence. Nearly the entire Hindu population have been driven out by Islamic miliants.
``For a stable society to emerge, Musharraf has to rein in the [Islamic guerrillas], but if he does that, he could lose domestic legitimacy fast,`` said Talat Massood, a retired Pakistani general. ``The country`s economic progress is completely blocked because of hostility with India, but there are key players with strong views on Kashmir, and he has to listen to them.``
The Pakistani intelligentsia in Islamabad views the fervor to fight for Kashmir to be of questionable value for Pakistan, and a thorn in the side of a dysfunctional economy and its ability to attract foreign investment. Real talks can only take place in an atmosphere of quiet and in a highly secret manner, they say. ``Which is more important - Kashmir, or Pakistan?`` says retired general Talaat Masood. ``I think we`ve lost our perspective on that question.``
Almost everyday foreign journalists have being flown by helicopter to the mountainous forward post in Pakistan occupied Kashmir for briefing on Kashmir, but all they want to know is how Pakistan helps Islamic militants infiltrate into India through these hills. Before leaving their briefing, journalists are handed a video and photographs, depicting decapitated civilians, allegedly the handiwork of Indian troops said to have crossed the Line of Control in February.
As the snow melts in the Kashmir valley, Moslem fighters will be taking their Koran and a
Kalashnikov rifle as they slip across the border into India.
``We will continue with our struggle. For us it makes no difference,`` trainee guerrilla Mohammad Hanif Abu Dojana, 21, said about the Clinton visit, as he sat cross-legged in a small office of Mujahideen Lashkar-e-Taiba in the port city of Karachi.
Lashkar says it is the largest Pakistan-based militant group fighting Indian rule in Kashmir,
with offices across the country collecting funds and recruits like Dojana, mostly from poor
neighbourhoods and villages.
Similar groups, like the Lashkar-e-Tayyba, whose membership and leadership include retired members
of Pakistan`s army and Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), are so much a part of the unofficial body politic in Pakistan now that they enjoy open material support from the Musharraf regime. At that group`s annual meeting last November, Lashkar`s chief, Hafiz Muhammad Saeed ranted that ``Issues cannot be solved without introducing the Islamic system. The Jehad is being organized under the leadership of Lashkar-e-Osama [Soldiers of Osama bin Laden].
In this fight, the United States is the biggest terrorist. Its diplomatic missions here patronize us!`` Even more unsettling than the fact that this speech was made exactly one week prior to the attack on the U.S. mission in Islamabad, is that this conference received a permit and security protection from the Pakistani government.
Dojana, sporting a small beard, is among hundreds of recruits who will join Lashkar`s suicide Fidayee groups, which are trained to attack military targets deep inside the disputed Himalayan region, the potential flashpoint of another Indo-Pakistani war.
But to these militants, a clash with India is a ``jihad`` (holy war) -- a chance to achieve what they believe to be the martyrdom they have been taught to prefer over life in this world.
``The Koran teaches us not to trust kafirs (infidels), so why expect anything from Clinton. We should be prepared for jihad; that is where our salvation lies,`` he said.
The militants also voiced confidence in the military-led government of General Pervez Musharraf who toppled prime minister Nawaz Sharif in October, over what Sharif says were differences over the handling of last summer`s confrontation with India in Kashmir.
``Yes, we are confident that the present regime in the present circumstances will not agree to any deal against the mujahideen (holy warriors),`` said Muhammad Yousuf Taiby, rector of the private University of Islamic Studies in Karachi.
Islamabad also supports the Islamic fundamentalist Taliban regime in Afghanistan, which harbours Saudi terrorist Osama bin Laden, the FBI`s Most Wanted.
Many Pakistanis regard bin Laden as a hero for his attacks on US facilities.
Taiby, 45, a graduate from Al-Azhar University in Cairo, made no effort to hide his leanings towards militancy. Most of his graduates end up working directly or indirectly for the guerrillas.
He said Pakistan was of vital strategic importance for what he called ``the world Islamic movement.``
``Pakistan is now the only country in the Moslem world where we can openly propagate and ask people to join in jihad,`` he said, adding that was what the United States was worried about.
Pakistan`s combination of a military Government, nuclear weapons capability, and support for
Muslim extremists in Kashmir, has transformed its image in the West from a somewhat autocratic,
yet moderate Islamic nation, into that of a reckless and unstable country.
Many Pakistanis share such concerns, but welcomed the coup because they thought a military
government might crack down on the Islamic right.
The banners that greeted the President on his drive through a capital turned ghost town by a massive
security operation, graphically illustrated Pakistan`s fatal obsession with Kashmir.
All the way to Islamabad, the pedestrian overpasses sported official banners demanding human rights for the Kashmiris, a mock-up of Pakistan`s nuclear test site and replicas of the medium-range missiles the country has developed, with China`s help.
Reality, in Pakistan, has become surreal, and dangerously so.
Pumped up by state-run broadcast media, the nation of 140 million people is fed an unrelenting diet of distorted and highly emotive propaganda about the plight of their brethren in Kashmir, India`s only
Muslim majority state. Kashmir has become the single most obsession for Pakistan.
On the ground in what the Pakistan Government calls the ``liberated`` area of Kashmir - basically the
part it controls - people displaced by the conflict are used to score points.
At Zaffar camp, they are brought out of their tents to denounce Indian shelling, and deny that armed
Muslim guerrillas regularly cross over to attack Indian forces, and create mayhem of the kind that
struck the Sikh-dominated village of Chattisinghpora, where 36 men were massacred by unidentified gunmen on the eve of Mr Clinton`s visit.
But Pakistan has also broken promises and its protests about injustices increasingly are falling on deaf ears.
In Pakistan, antipathy among ethnic groups and violence between Sunni and Shiite Muslims have been aggravated by economic decay and breathtaking misgovernment. Before he was deposed by the military last year, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif centralized power, undermining Pakistan`s legislature, judiciary and provincial
governments.
Since 1994, the role of native Kashmiris in the insurgency has diminished as heavily armed outsiders from Pakistan and Afghanistan have stepped up the violence. Nearly the entire Hindu population have been driven out by Islamic miliants.
``For a stable society to emerge, Musharraf has to rein in the [Islamic guerrillas], but if he does that, he could lose domestic legitimacy fast,`` said Talat Massood, a retired Pakistani general. ``The country`s economic progress is completely blocked because of hostility with India, but there are key players with strong views on Kashmir, and he has to listen to them.``
The Pakistani intelligentsia in Islamabad views the fervor to fight for Kashmir to be of questionable value for Pakistan, and a thorn in the side of a dysfunctional economy and its ability to attract foreign investment. Real talks can only take place in an atmosphere of quiet and in a highly secret manner, they say. ``Which is more important - Kashmir, or Pakistan?`` says retired general Talaat Masood. ``I think we`ve lost our perspective on that question.``
#328 Posted by mohajir on March 30, 2000 4:17:45 pm
Pakistan`s combination of a military Government, nuclear weapons capability, and support for Muslim extremists in Kashmir, has transformed its image in the West from a somewhat autocratic, yet moderate Islamic nation, into that of a reckless and unstable country.
Many Pakistanis share such concerns, but welcomed the coup because they thought a military government might crack down on the Islamic right.
Yet five months after the coup, it is clear that General Musharraf has very little room for manoeuvre.
The United States President, Mr Bill Clinton, got some idea of just how little when he dropped in for lunch in Islamabad last Sunday. The general offered no concessions.
The banners that greeted the President on his drive through a capital turned ghost town by a massive security operation, graphically illustrated Pakistan`s fatal obsession with Kashmir.
All the way to Islamabad, the pedestrian overpasses sported official banners demanding human rights for the Kashmiris, a mock-up of Pakistan`s nuclear test site and replicas of the medium-range missiles the country has developed, with China`s help.
Reality, in Pakistan, has become surreal, and dangerously so.
Pumped up by state-run broadcast media, the nation of 140 million people is fed an unrelenting diet of distorted and highly emotive propaganda about the plight of their brethren in Kashmir, India`s only Muslim majority state.
Before leaving their briefing, journalists are handed a video and photographs, depicting decapitated civilians, allegedly the handiwork of Indian troops said to have crossed the Line of Control in February.
On the ground in what the Pakistan Government calls the ``liberated`` area of Kashmir - basically the part it controls - people displaced by the conflict are used to score points.
At Zaffar camp, they are brought out of their tents to denounce Indian shelling, and deny that armed Muslim guerrillas regularly cross over to attack Indian forces, and create mayhem of the kind that struck the Sikh-dominated village of Chattisinghpora, where 36 men were massacred by unidentified gunmen on the eve of Mr Clinton`s visit.
But Brigadier Nawaz admits the wider propaganda war is being lost. ``We can`t get our point of view across, because the world is looking at India as a vast market,`` he says.
``Liberating`` Kashmir has become an article of faith for Pakistan`s generals. Clinton can point out to the military regime that the conflict with India is ruining Pakistan`s economy and its international relations. But will a country with its back to the wall listen to economic and political logic?
Many Pakistanis share such concerns, but welcomed the coup because they thought a military government might crack down on the Islamic right.
Yet five months after the coup, it is clear that General Musharraf has very little room for manoeuvre.
The United States President, Mr Bill Clinton, got some idea of just how little when he dropped in for lunch in Islamabad last Sunday. The general offered no concessions.
The banners that greeted the President on his drive through a capital turned ghost town by a massive security operation, graphically illustrated Pakistan`s fatal obsession with Kashmir.
All the way to Islamabad, the pedestrian overpasses sported official banners demanding human rights for the Kashmiris, a mock-up of Pakistan`s nuclear test site and replicas of the medium-range missiles the country has developed, with China`s help.
Reality, in Pakistan, has become surreal, and dangerously so.
Pumped up by state-run broadcast media, the nation of 140 million people is fed an unrelenting diet of distorted and highly emotive propaganda about the plight of their brethren in Kashmir, India`s only Muslim majority state.
Before leaving their briefing, journalists are handed a video and photographs, depicting decapitated civilians, allegedly the handiwork of Indian troops said to have crossed the Line of Control in February.
On the ground in what the Pakistan Government calls the ``liberated`` area of Kashmir - basically the part it controls - people displaced by the conflict are used to score points.
At Zaffar camp, they are brought out of their tents to denounce Indian shelling, and deny that armed Muslim guerrillas regularly cross over to attack Indian forces, and create mayhem of the kind that struck the Sikh-dominated village of Chattisinghpora, where 36 men were massacred by unidentified gunmen on the eve of Mr Clinton`s visit.
But Brigadier Nawaz admits the wider propaganda war is being lost. ``We can`t get our point of view across, because the world is looking at India as a vast market,`` he says.
``Liberating`` Kashmir has become an article of faith for Pakistan`s generals. Clinton can point out to the military regime that the conflict with India is ruining Pakistan`s economy and its international relations. But will a country with its back to the wall listen to economic and political logic?
#327 Posted by mohajir on March 30, 2000 12:44:17 am
Open Letter to Peter Jennings and ABC World News
CHICAGO, March 23 /PRNewswire/ -- The Community Action Network today issued the following open letter to Peter Jennings and ABC World News:
March 23, 2000
RE: Peter Jennings special, ``The Dark Horizon: India, Pakistan and the Bomb.``
Aired Monday, March 20, 10pm EST.
Tom Yellin, Executive Producer
Peter Jennings, Anchor
ABC World News
47 W. 66th St, 2nd floor
New York, NY 10023
Dear Mr. Yellin and Mr. Jennings,
On behalf of the Indian-American community, we thank you and your network for being the first to highlight the serious, potentially nuclear confrontation that exists between India and Pakistan. Peter Jennings succeeded in conveying to the American public the complex geopolitical factors underlying the conflict over Kashmir, including the involvement of the U.S. and Afghanistan. We encourage ABC News to continue producing insightful programs on Kashmir, in order to educate the American public on what President Clinton recently called ``the most dangerous region in the world.``
However, we are deeply disappointed by two serious factual omissions in the broadcast of this program. The first omission occurred during the historical explanation of the conflict, when Mr. Jennings stated, ``Under great pressure from both sides, he [Maharaja of Kashmir] chose India.``
The general consensus among historians and U.S. experts is that the pressure was only from one side, namely Pakistan. This pressure was exerted directly and forcefully via an invasion of Kashmir by Pakistani troops and tribesmen. It is this unilateral ``pressure`` which forced the Maharaja of Kashmir to choose India, and thus obtain the military assistance to ward off the invading Pakistani forces. The best evidence for this comes not from India, but from Pakistan itself, in a book written by the Pakistani general who led the invasion into Kashmir (Raiders in Kashmir, by Major General Akbar Khan, Pak Publishers, Karachi, 1970).
The evidence of unilateral pressure from Pakistan is further corroborated by many reliable sources, including H.V. Hodson, a British civil servant who worked with Lord Mountbatten and was intimately involved in the partition of India and Pakistan. He documents in his book, The Great Divide (Oxford Univ. Press, Karachi, 1985), that Indian leaders were disinterested in the question of Kashmir`s accession to either Pakistan or India. This disproves Peter Jennings` assertion of Indian pressure in the role of Kashmir`s accession to India.
The second glaring omission relates to the statement, ``Most Kashmiris regard the Indian army as an army of occupation, with a brutal 10-year history of repression.`` This statement does not take into account the personal experiences of 400,000 exiled Kashmiri Hindus, Sikhs, and Buddhists that instead regard Islamic terrorism and its ``jihad`` as the primary force of repression in Kashmir. This minority community has constituted the largest post-Independent exodus in India, with a statistical significance that in percentages matches the exodus of ethnic Albanians from Kosovo in early 1999. Tens of thousands of these refugees still languish in makeshift camps in the region of Jammu. Yet during all of Mr. Jennings` travels to Pakistan, India, and the Valley of Kashmir, he was unable to show any video footage of these Kashmiris whose lives have been drastically altered by the repressive forces of Islamic terrorism.
In commenting upon a 10-year history of repression in Kashmir, Mr. Jennings also omitted the most gruesome examples -- the massacre of thousands of moderate Muslims and secular Hindus who spoke against Islamic extremism, and the very reason behind the Indian army`s heavy presence in Kashmir. The massacres continued even during President Clinton`s India visit, when Islamic extremists butchered at least 35 Sikh minorities.
Even though such examples of repression -- indeed, ethnic cleansing -- of the Kashmiri minority community is well documented, not a word of this was mentioned in the broadcast. Even President Clinton acknowledged what Peter Jennings did not, that terrorism unleashed against the religious minorities is of grave concern, and one that must absolutely stop before the Indian government can seriously consider addressing the grievances of the Kashmiri people.
Prior to the onslaught of Islamic terrorism in the last ten years, the peaceful coexistence of Muslims and Hindus in Kashmir was a shining example of India`s secular values, as specifically noted by Mahatma Gandhi in 1947. It is a return to these secular values that we Indian-Americans desire. This process requires an acknowledgement of the current environment in which Hindus and other minorities are being selectively slaughtered in Kashmir, so that appropriate steps for its reversal can be implemented. It is for this reason that Peter Jennings` complete omission of the ethnic cleansing of Hindus takes on such significance.
The Indian-American community would like these omissions to be acknowledged by your network, and moreover, be rectified in future broadcasts on Kashmir. In addition, we look forward to meeting with your staff and personally conveying our sentiments on this issue.
Sincerely,
Rajiv Pandit
Coordinator, Community Action Network
(a project of Hindu Students Council)
Ph: 617-698-1106
Fax: 801-382-3919
Email: hsc-can@hindunet.org
THE FOLLOWING ORGANIZATIONS HAVE ENDORSED THIS LETTER:
Vijay Sazawal
Darnestown, MD
Indo-American Kashmir Forum
Ph. 301-941-8377
Email: vks@iaol.com
Ashok Koul
Ontario, Canada
Indo-Canadian Kashmir Forum
Ph. 613-744-7574
Email: Ashok.Koul@nrc.ca
Jeevan Zutshi
Fremont, CA
Indo-American Community Federation
Ph. 415-557-8454
Email: G1Zutshi@aol.com
Bharat Barai
Federation of Indian-American Associations (Chicago)
Ph. 219-924-0912
Email: bhbarai@concentric.net
Lalit Wanchoo
Mitchellville, MD
Kashmiri Overseas Association
www.koausa.org
Ph. 301-350-4072
Email: wanchoo@koausa.org
Subodh Atal
Columbia, MD
Kashmir Information Network
www.kashmir-information.com
Ph. 410-309-0841
Email: atals@home.com
SOURCE Community Action Network
CO: Community Action Network
ST: Illinois, New York
IN:
SU:
03/23/2000 09:12 EST http://www.prnewswire.com
CHICAGO, March 23 /PRNewswire/ -- The Community Action Network today issued the following open letter to Peter Jennings and ABC World News:
March 23, 2000
RE: Peter Jennings special, ``The Dark Horizon: India, Pakistan and the Bomb.``
Aired Monday, March 20, 10pm EST.
Tom Yellin, Executive Producer
Peter Jennings, Anchor
ABC World News
47 W. 66th St, 2nd floor
New York, NY 10023
Dear Mr. Yellin and Mr. Jennings,
On behalf of the Indian-American community, we thank you and your network for being the first to highlight the serious, potentially nuclear confrontation that exists between India and Pakistan. Peter Jennings succeeded in conveying to the American public the complex geopolitical factors underlying the conflict over Kashmir, including the involvement of the U.S. and Afghanistan. We encourage ABC News to continue producing insightful programs on Kashmir, in order to educate the American public on what President Clinton recently called ``the most dangerous region in the world.``
However, we are deeply disappointed by two serious factual omissions in the broadcast of this program. The first omission occurred during the historical explanation of the conflict, when Mr. Jennings stated, ``Under great pressure from both sides, he [Maharaja of Kashmir] chose India.``
The general consensus among historians and U.S. experts is that the pressure was only from one side, namely Pakistan. This pressure was exerted directly and forcefully via an invasion of Kashmir by Pakistani troops and tribesmen. It is this unilateral ``pressure`` which forced the Maharaja of Kashmir to choose India, and thus obtain the military assistance to ward off the invading Pakistani forces. The best evidence for this comes not from India, but from Pakistan itself, in a book written by the Pakistani general who led the invasion into Kashmir (Raiders in Kashmir, by Major General Akbar Khan, Pak Publishers, Karachi, 1970).
The evidence of unilateral pressure from Pakistan is further corroborated by many reliable sources, including H.V. Hodson, a British civil servant who worked with Lord Mountbatten and was intimately involved in the partition of India and Pakistan. He documents in his book, The Great Divide (Oxford Univ. Press, Karachi, 1985), that Indian leaders were disinterested in the question of Kashmir`s accession to either Pakistan or India. This disproves Peter Jennings` assertion of Indian pressure in the role of Kashmir`s accession to India.
The second glaring omission relates to the statement, ``Most Kashmiris regard the Indian army as an army of occupation, with a brutal 10-year history of repression.`` This statement does not take into account the personal experiences of 400,000 exiled Kashmiri Hindus, Sikhs, and Buddhists that instead regard Islamic terrorism and its ``jihad`` as the primary force of repression in Kashmir. This minority community has constituted the largest post-Independent exodus in India, with a statistical significance that in percentages matches the exodus of ethnic Albanians from Kosovo in early 1999. Tens of thousands of these refugees still languish in makeshift camps in the region of Jammu. Yet during all of Mr. Jennings` travels to Pakistan, India, and the Valley of Kashmir, he was unable to show any video footage of these Kashmiris whose lives have been drastically altered by the repressive forces of Islamic terrorism.
In commenting upon a 10-year history of repression in Kashmir, Mr. Jennings also omitted the most gruesome examples -- the massacre of thousands of moderate Muslims and secular Hindus who spoke against Islamic extremism, and the very reason behind the Indian army`s heavy presence in Kashmir. The massacres continued even during President Clinton`s India visit, when Islamic extremists butchered at least 35 Sikh minorities.
Even though such examples of repression -- indeed, ethnic cleansing -- of the Kashmiri minority community is well documented, not a word of this was mentioned in the broadcast. Even President Clinton acknowledged what Peter Jennings did not, that terrorism unleashed against the religious minorities is of grave concern, and one that must absolutely stop before the Indian government can seriously consider addressing the grievances of the Kashmiri people.
Prior to the onslaught of Islamic terrorism in the last ten years, the peaceful coexistence of Muslims and Hindus in Kashmir was a shining example of India`s secular values, as specifically noted by Mahatma Gandhi in 1947. It is a return to these secular values that we Indian-Americans desire. This process requires an acknowledgement of the current environment in which Hindus and other minorities are being selectively slaughtered in Kashmir, so that appropriate steps for its reversal can be implemented. It is for this reason that Peter Jennings` complete omission of the ethnic cleansing of Hindus takes on such significance.
The Indian-American community would like these omissions to be acknowledged by your network, and moreover, be rectified in future broadcasts on Kashmir. In addition, we look forward to meeting with your staff and personally conveying our sentiments on this issue.
Sincerely,
Rajiv Pandit
Coordinator, Community Action Network
(a project of Hindu Students Council)
Ph: 617-698-1106
Fax: 801-382-3919
Email: hsc-can@hindunet.org
THE FOLLOWING ORGANIZATIONS HAVE ENDORSED THIS LETTER:
Vijay Sazawal
Darnestown, MD
Indo-American Kashmir Forum
Ph. 301-941-8377
Email: vks@iaol.com
Ashok Koul
Ontario, Canada
Indo-Canadian Kashmir Forum
Ph. 613-744-7574
Email: Ashok.Koul@nrc.ca
Jeevan Zutshi
Fremont, CA
Indo-American Community Federation
Ph. 415-557-8454
Email: G1Zutshi@aol.com
Bharat Barai
Federation of Indian-American Associations (Chicago)
Ph. 219-924-0912
Email: bhbarai@concentric.net
Lalit Wanchoo
Mitchellville, MD
Kashmiri Overseas Association
www.koausa.org
Ph. 301-350-4072
Email: wanchoo@koausa.org
Subodh Atal
Columbia, MD
Kashmir Information Network
www.kashmir-information.com
Ph. 410-309-0841
Email: atals@home.com
SOURCE Community Action Network
CO: Community Action Network
ST: Illinois, New York
IN:
SU:
03/23/2000 09:12 EST http://www.prnewswire.com
#326 Posted by Sheesh Naag on March 11, 2000 1:51:34 am
Some from elsewhere on the Chowk, some from outside:
Lawyer for Ousted Pakistan PM
Gunned Down
March 10, 2000 10:29 AM EST
KARACHI (Reuters) - Unidentified gunmen shot dead a lawyer defending Pakistan`s ousted prime minister Nawaz Sharif against a possible death sentence in a daylight
attack on his city center offices Friday.
Police and witnesses said Iqbal Raad, a leading member of Sharif`s defense team, died from a volley of bullets to his chest. An office assistant and the visiting son of a High
Court judge who were in the premises were also killed.
Pakistani military ruler General Pervez Musharraf called the killing ``a dastardly act of terrorism.``
The murder happened just weeks before President Clinton visits Pakistan.
A spokesmen for Sharif`s Pakistan Muslim League (PML), which was ousted in a bloodless Oct. 12 coup by Musharraf, said Raad had received a number of threats but declined to elaborate.
``For the past some days he was complaining that he was receiving threats,`` Raja Zafarul Haq told Reuters in Islamabad.
He declined to comment on a possible motive for the slaying, but said it would hamper Sharif`s defense, which resumes Monday.
The head of the legal team defending Sharif, Khwaja Sultan, said that the defense was ``terrified at the killing and would like to know the motives behind it.`` xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
U.N. Protests ... on
International Women`s Day
March 8, 2000 1:09 PM EST
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters)
UNICEF, the U.N. Children`s Fund, condemned ``honor killings,`` an ancient practice in which men kill female relatives for forced or suspected sexual activity outside marriage, even if they had been raped.
In 1997, some 300 women were killed in the name of ``honor`` in Pakistan alone. In Yemen, as many as 400 such crimes took place in 1997, while in India an estimated 5,000 women are killed annually because their in-laws consider their dowries inadequate.
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnmmmmmmmmm
Women`s Day Marked With
Protest ... .
March 8, 2000 2:42 PM EST
LONDON (Reuters) - Women marked International Women`s Day Wednesday with protests at continued violence and discrimination, ... . Acting U.N. Coordinator for Afghanistan ..., told a news conference in neighboring Pakistan: ``In terms of attitude, in terms of approach, I am not saying there has been a 100 percent turnaround.
``But yes, (we have moved) from a very tough and difficult period to a much more flexible period,`` he said.
.................
Lawyer for Ousted Pakistan PM
Gunned Down
March 10, 2000 10:29 AM EST
KARACHI (Reuters) - Unidentified gunmen shot dead a lawyer defending Pakistan`s ousted prime minister Nawaz Sharif against a possible death sentence in a daylight
attack on his city center offices Friday.
Police and witnesses said Iqbal Raad, a leading member of Sharif`s defense team, died from a volley of bullets to his chest. An office assistant and the visiting son of a High
Court judge who were in the premises were also killed.
Pakistani military ruler General Pervez Musharraf called the killing ``a dastardly act of terrorism.``
The murder happened just weeks before President Clinton visits Pakistan.
A spokesmen for Sharif`s Pakistan Muslim League (PML), which was ousted in a bloodless Oct. 12 coup by Musharraf, said Raad had received a number of threats but declined to elaborate.
``For the past some days he was complaining that he was receiving threats,`` Raja Zafarul Haq told Reuters in Islamabad.
He declined to comment on a possible motive for the slaying, but said it would hamper Sharif`s defense, which resumes Monday.
The head of the legal team defending Sharif, Khwaja Sultan, said that the defense was ``terrified at the killing and would like to know the motives behind it.`` xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
U.N. Protests ... on
International Women`s Day
March 8, 2000 1:09 PM EST
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters)
UNICEF, the U.N. Children`s Fund, condemned ``honor killings,`` an ancient practice in which men kill female relatives for forced or suspected sexual activity outside marriage, even if they had been raped.
In 1997, some 300 women were killed in the name of ``honor`` in Pakistan alone. In Yemen, as many as 400 such crimes took place in 1997, while in India an estimated 5,000 women are killed annually because their in-laws consider their dowries inadequate.
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnmmmmmmmmm
Women`s Day Marked With
Protest ... .
March 8, 2000 2:42 PM EST
LONDON (Reuters) - Women marked International Women`s Day Wednesday with protests at continued violence and discrimination, ... . Acting U.N. Coordinator for Afghanistan ..., told a news conference in neighboring Pakistan: ``In terms of attitude, in terms of approach, I am not saying there has been a 100 percent turnaround.
``But yes, (we have moved) from a very tough and difficult period to a much more flexible period,`` he said.
.................
#325 Posted by temporal on January 22, 2000 4:13:16 pm
Bilal:
Speaking of Devolution Tariq Husain wrote a thought provoking AND practical article in the current Friday Times. He was with the World Bank since the 60s and retired last fall. It will be great if he can be persuaded to write for the Chowk.
rgds
t
The devolution of insolvency
By Tariq Husain
A Reference to the Context
Nasruddin, ferrying a pedant across a piece of rough water, said something ungrammatical to him. ``Have you never studied grammar?`` asked the scholar.
``No.``
``Then half of your life has been wasted.``
A few minutes later Nasruddin turned to the passenger. ``Have you ever learned how to swim?``
``No. Why?``
``Then all your life is wasted - we are sinking!``
- ``The Subtleties of Mulla Nasruddin`` in Idries Shah, The Sufis.
In the sink-or-swim situation in which the country finds itself, it would be hard to find anyone who does not hope for things to improve fast. This hope will be dashed, if time and resources are wasted on purely scholastic approaches or reviving failed experiments. What various institutions can and cannot do for the well being of the people is well known. Given the urgency, therefore, it is worth considering what these institutions should aim to do better, if the goal is empowerment at the grassroots, the objectives those of nation building and the yardstick that of performance.
Considerations such as these are not new to Pakistan, but they lie buried in expediency and cynicism. The resulting degradation of the ethos probably cannot be reversed, unless there is a vision with which people can empathise and communicate once again. There is a vision, for example, in the Muslim League manifesto of 1948, when it was the ruling party of a newly independent Pakistan, that speaks of the ``very widest extension of local government on the models of the parishes and communes of the United States.`` There is a vision too in the law sponsored (but not implemented) by the Pakistan People`s Party in the Punjab Assembly during its first stint in power in the 1970s. And there is a vision in the 1987 Federal Cabinet proposal for taking local government down to the village and mohalla levels.
One part of the vision to which these references speak is that of self-government by communities. But these are references only to the structure, laws and other formal trappings of local governance. What people communicate in their expressions of hope is something less concrete, but also more than this, something more subjective but closer to themselves. These may be the values that lie buried in despair and cynicism, values around which the meaning of community is gifted and engendered, then nurtured and sustained, and bequeathed with pride and confidence.
And among these values there may be notions of service, a value without which it is hard to conceive an abundance of returns, either material or less visible. There may be tolerance, without which differences consume not only countries and communities but also families and individuals. There may be honesty, without which not only democracy and development but also debate and discourse regress to the mean. Be that as it may, it is meaningless to speak of progress without its vision and values: it is futile to invoke self-government without the self.
Engaging people in a collective vision of community and governance is central to the mission of reconstruction. This is only partly a scholastic mission, for renewal depends on the extent to which it takes place, and that is only the extent to which people adopt it. Part of the mission, therefore, is to bring the visionaries, architects and builders of the country into a movement, in essence replicating the efforts of the millions who created Pakistan. For there are visionaries, architects and builders in every community in the land, yearning to be something more than they are, to be part of something bigger than themselves. Once they accept the mission for renewal, then the ways and means would also be found.
It does not seem possible, however, to find ways and means merely by looking for them. For if it were, then economists and entrepreneurs would have found ways to revive the economy, financial experts and revenue collectors would have filled the coffers of the state, planners and implementers would have developed the country, the mass media would have created mass awareness, and politicians, administrators and judges would have established good governance. The project of the moment is clearly bigger than these actors, but it is essentially a project, and one that can be completed in a given timeframe, once its objectives are clarified. The objectives, however, are not sectoral or functional - they are holistic objectives, for they are the objectives of nation building rather than individual institutions.
Consider, in particular, that the over-riding compulsion of the state, for many years now, has been to devolve insolvency or dissipate it through market forces. Policies in areas as diverse as privatisation, foreign exchange, Treasury Bill auctions, the National Finance Commission Award, user charges and community participation, have been driven, if not entirely motivated, by one over-riding concern, namely, to generate resources and otherwise control the insolvency of the government. In all such attempts, the state`s compulsion for mobilising resources has brought forth an equal and opposite expectation, because resource sharing and power sharing are two sides of the same coin. The dynamic that has resulted is not simply an economic, political or social issue, but all of these, and it questions all areas of jurisdiction of the state.
Once this is accepted, then holistic objectives that serve a certain vision and mission for reconstruction would begin to emerge. They would point to the establishment of institutions that empower people as citizens, instead of dismissing them as subjects, that endow them with authority wherever they accept responsibility, protect them from harm where authority can be abused, develop their assets based on their initiatives, and so on. There is one objective, however, that over-rides all others, simply because it forces all stakeholders to reconcile personal and institutional interests with national interest. This objective is the complete devolution of insolvency from the Federal and provincial governments to the districts, cities and grassroots, within a short enough timeframe that reflects the gravity of the fiscal crisis.
There is persuasive evidence from South Asian and neighbouring countries that nothing imparts greater honesty to discourse between the state and its citizens than the matter of financial and managerial responsibility. Given the outlook for public finances, the state has no option but to devolve insolvency to junior governments and the grassroots, and the people have no choice but to accept responsibility for financing and managing their affairs. The people know these facts because they live with them, but state institutions resist, for it is not in their interest to devolve power along with their liabilities. The points of resistance - political, legal, administrative and financial - lie along the divide between provincial authorities and community governance.
Left to themselves, provincial interests will simply emasculate local governments and grassroots initiatives, as they have in the past. Clearly, then, there cannot be a resolution to this debilitating impasse - for that is what it is - without pro-active leadership from the Federal Government. The experience with institutional change, however, is that those who lead and plan change must also be made responsible for implementing their plans. When this is not done, it is only by chance that change is implemented as planned. Given the country`s institutional set-up, realistic planning and effective implementation require an integrated team representing Federal and provincial interests, responsible for planning and implementing devolution, and communicating to all concerned the standard message of managed change, ``We will carry the wounded and shoot the stragglers.``
The way ahead for devolution and progress at the grassroots would then become more-or-less clear. It could be described in a few strategic thrusts, for example:
1.Devolving power in a wide range of areas of responsibility from provincial governments to cities, districts and other appropriate territorial units that best serve a particular sector.
2.Safeguarding the interests of the people against excesses by local elites including landlords, businessmen and public functionaries.
3.Incorporation of self-government by communities within a city or district for selected functions and services that are best managed in smaller units.
4.Organisation of the poor and vulnerable for alleviating poverty and giving them voice in governance and development.
The first two of these thrusts might require the most effort, not necessarily for creating the structures that are required in the political, administrative and judicial spheres, mass media or civil society, but in meeting the expectations of the people in view of the limited experience of the country. It would seem to be of the utmost importance, therefore, to manage expectations realistically. This is best achieved by obtaining the perspectives of the stakeholders through a transparent process. The process, however, has to be planned in a structured and disciplined way, much like a process of change management, so that it is not undermined by competing interests or overwhelmed by the scale of consultation that is indicated.
The third and fourth thrusts indicated above can be developed from the best relevant experiences in the cities and villages of Pakistan, essentially by asking communities, ``What responsibility are you willing to accept for managing schools, dispensaries, water, sanitation, forests, etc. and helping the poor and destitute?`` One answer is that the government should take all or most of the responsibility. This is a recipe for creating dependency, for it does not inculcate pride and citizenship, promote responsibility and make do with what is available.
A different answer comes from those who have been touched by the work of the late Dr. Akhter Hameed Khan, Pakistan`s first Magsaysay Award winner in 1963. One measure of his impact on grassroots development, across the boundaries of South Asia and beyond its shores, is that seven of his younger associates were recognised with Magsaysay Awards. His solutions are driven singularly by what is readily available to the poor, and the pride that resides within them. He would start from a simple truth - acknowledging what people are doing for themselves - and then help them do it better and cheaper. With help from institutions such as the Orangi Pilot Project and Rural Support Programmes, people in need have been responding to this method for more than twenty years. But it is precisely now that what he envisioned for a poor country, even as it was spending its way into insolvency, appears so apt for a people left with little more than themselves. If his promise rings true, and if those who survive him can promise what he did, then the future is already here.
The author is an international consultant in change management and Managing Director of Enterprise & Development Consulting (Private) Limited, Islamabad.
---30----
Speaking of Devolution Tariq Husain wrote a thought provoking AND practical article in the current Friday Times. He was with the World Bank since the 60s and retired last fall. It will be great if he can be persuaded to write for the Chowk.
rgds
t
The devolution of insolvency
By Tariq Husain
A Reference to the Context
Nasruddin, ferrying a pedant across a piece of rough water, said something ungrammatical to him. ``Have you never studied grammar?`` asked the scholar.
``No.``
``Then half of your life has been wasted.``
A few minutes later Nasruddin turned to the passenger. ``Have you ever learned how to swim?``
``No. Why?``
``Then all your life is wasted - we are sinking!``
- ``The Subtleties of Mulla Nasruddin`` in Idries Shah, The Sufis.
In the sink-or-swim situation in which the country finds itself, it would be hard to find anyone who does not hope for things to improve fast. This hope will be dashed, if time and resources are wasted on purely scholastic approaches or reviving failed experiments. What various institutions can and cannot do for the well being of the people is well known. Given the urgency, therefore, it is worth considering what these institutions should aim to do better, if the goal is empowerment at the grassroots, the objectives those of nation building and the yardstick that of performance.
Considerations such as these are not new to Pakistan, but they lie buried in expediency and cynicism. The resulting degradation of the ethos probably cannot be reversed, unless there is a vision with which people can empathise and communicate once again. There is a vision, for example, in the Muslim League manifesto of 1948, when it was the ruling party of a newly independent Pakistan, that speaks of the ``very widest extension of local government on the models of the parishes and communes of the United States.`` There is a vision too in the law sponsored (but not implemented) by the Pakistan People`s Party in the Punjab Assembly during its first stint in power in the 1970s. And there is a vision in the 1987 Federal Cabinet proposal for taking local government down to the village and mohalla levels.
One part of the vision to which these references speak is that of self-government by communities. But these are references only to the structure, laws and other formal trappings of local governance. What people communicate in their expressions of hope is something less concrete, but also more than this, something more subjective but closer to themselves. These may be the values that lie buried in despair and cynicism, values around which the meaning of community is gifted and engendered, then nurtured and sustained, and bequeathed with pride and confidence.
And among these values there may be notions of service, a value without which it is hard to conceive an abundance of returns, either material or less visible. There may be tolerance, without which differences consume not only countries and communities but also families and individuals. There may be honesty, without which not only democracy and development but also debate and discourse regress to the mean. Be that as it may, it is meaningless to speak of progress without its vision and values: it is futile to invoke self-government without the self.
Engaging people in a collective vision of community and governance is central to the mission of reconstruction. This is only partly a scholastic mission, for renewal depends on the extent to which it takes place, and that is only the extent to which people adopt it. Part of the mission, therefore, is to bring the visionaries, architects and builders of the country into a movement, in essence replicating the efforts of the millions who created Pakistan. For there are visionaries, architects and builders in every community in the land, yearning to be something more than they are, to be part of something bigger than themselves. Once they accept the mission for renewal, then the ways and means would also be found.
It does not seem possible, however, to find ways and means merely by looking for them. For if it were, then economists and entrepreneurs would have found ways to revive the economy, financial experts and revenue collectors would have filled the coffers of the state, planners and implementers would have developed the country, the mass media would have created mass awareness, and politicians, administrators and judges would have established good governance. The project of the moment is clearly bigger than these actors, but it is essentially a project, and one that can be completed in a given timeframe, once its objectives are clarified. The objectives, however, are not sectoral or functional - they are holistic objectives, for they are the objectives of nation building rather than individual institutions.
Consider, in particular, that the over-riding compulsion of the state, for many years now, has been to devolve insolvency or dissipate it through market forces. Policies in areas as diverse as privatisation, foreign exchange, Treasury Bill auctions, the National Finance Commission Award, user charges and community participation, have been driven, if not entirely motivated, by one over-riding concern, namely, to generate resources and otherwise control the insolvency of the government. In all such attempts, the state`s compulsion for mobilising resources has brought forth an equal and opposite expectation, because resource sharing and power sharing are two sides of the same coin. The dynamic that has resulted is not simply an economic, political or social issue, but all of these, and it questions all areas of jurisdiction of the state.
Once this is accepted, then holistic objectives that serve a certain vision and mission for reconstruction would begin to emerge. They would point to the establishment of institutions that empower people as citizens, instead of dismissing them as subjects, that endow them with authority wherever they accept responsibility, protect them from harm where authority can be abused, develop their assets based on their initiatives, and so on. There is one objective, however, that over-rides all others, simply because it forces all stakeholders to reconcile personal and institutional interests with national interest. This objective is the complete devolution of insolvency from the Federal and provincial governments to the districts, cities and grassroots, within a short enough timeframe that reflects the gravity of the fiscal crisis.
There is persuasive evidence from South Asian and neighbouring countries that nothing imparts greater honesty to discourse between the state and its citizens than the matter of financial and managerial responsibility. Given the outlook for public finances, the state has no option but to devolve insolvency to junior governments and the grassroots, and the people have no choice but to accept responsibility for financing and managing their affairs. The people know these facts because they live with them, but state institutions resist, for it is not in their interest to devolve power along with their liabilities. The points of resistance - political, legal, administrative and financial - lie along the divide between provincial authorities and community governance.
Left to themselves, provincial interests will simply emasculate local governments and grassroots initiatives, as they have in the past. Clearly, then, there cannot be a resolution to this debilitating impasse - for that is what it is - without pro-active leadership from the Federal Government. The experience with institutional change, however, is that those who lead and plan change must also be made responsible for implementing their plans. When this is not done, it is only by chance that change is implemented as planned. Given the country`s institutional set-up, realistic planning and effective implementation require an integrated team representing Federal and provincial interests, responsible for planning and implementing devolution, and communicating to all concerned the standard message of managed change, ``We will carry the wounded and shoot the stragglers.``
The way ahead for devolution and progress at the grassroots would then become more-or-less clear. It could be described in a few strategic thrusts, for example:
1.Devolving power in a wide range of areas of responsibility from provincial governments to cities, districts and other appropriate territorial units that best serve a particular sector.
2.Safeguarding the interests of the people against excesses by local elites including landlords, businessmen and public functionaries.
3.Incorporation of self-government by communities within a city or district for selected functions and services that are best managed in smaller units.
4.Organisation of the poor and vulnerable for alleviating poverty and giving them voice in governance and development.
The first two of these thrusts might require the most effort, not necessarily for creating the structures that are required in the political, administrative and judicial spheres, mass media or civil society, but in meeting the expectations of the people in view of the limited experience of the country. It would seem to be of the utmost importance, therefore, to manage expectations realistically. This is best achieved by obtaining the perspectives of the stakeholders through a transparent process. The process, however, has to be planned in a structured and disciplined way, much like a process of change management, so that it is not undermined by competing interests or overwhelmed by the scale of consultation that is indicated.
The third and fourth thrusts indicated above can be developed from the best relevant experiences in the cities and villages of Pakistan, essentially by asking communities, ``What responsibility are you willing to accept for managing schools, dispensaries, water, sanitation, forests, etc. and helping the poor and destitute?`` One answer is that the government should take all or most of the responsibility. This is a recipe for creating dependency, for it does not inculcate pride and citizenship, promote responsibility and make do with what is available.
A different answer comes from those who have been touched by the work of the late Dr. Akhter Hameed Khan, Pakistan`s first Magsaysay Award winner in 1963. One measure of his impact on grassroots development, across the boundaries of South Asia and beyond its shores, is that seven of his younger associates were recognised with Magsaysay Awards. His solutions are driven singularly by what is readily available to the poor, and the pride that resides within them. He would start from a simple truth - acknowledging what people are doing for themselves - and then help them do it better and cheaper. With help from institutions such as the Orangi Pilot Project and Rural Support Programmes, people in need have been responding to this method for more than twenty years. But it is precisely now that what he envisioned for a poor country, even as it was spending its way into insolvency, appears so apt for a people left with little more than themselves. If his promise rings true, and if those who survive him can promise what he did, then the future is already here.
The author is an international consultant in change management and Managing Director of Enterprise & Development Consulting (Private) Limited, Islamabad.
---30----
#324 Posted by ferozk on January 21, 2000 6:10:11 am
RE: Zeemax
Interesting ideas for the future well being of Pakistan.....
I tend to be in agreement with some of them, but generally am of the view, as you have articulated, the only viable salvation for Pakistan, is the way forward.
What you have labored and produced is nothing short of a ``mission statement`` or a policy paper to cure the ills of Pakistan. It is here that my biggest problem, with the suggestions, arises.
There is a distint difference in suggesting a road map for Pakistan`s survival and following it diligently. Like all governments before it, this one too will be measured by its` ability to implement it reformist program to better Pakistan. To paraphrase the Americans, ``its the implementation, stupid`` and until that point till we meaningfully do what we say, nothing is going to happen for the better in Pakistan. There are too many options and suggestions on what Pakistan can do and unless we act on those suggestions, plans, programs etc., nothing will happen.
The critical question/problem in Pakistan is not a lack of a political vector or a direction, but whether we, as a nation, want to get where we have to. Pakistan has produced plans/suggestions like yours in ample quantity in the last 53 years and it still has nothing to show for it. Why?
To quote Yeats in refrence to Pakistan,
``a waste of breath seems the years behind
and a waste of breath the years to come,
in balance with life, this death``.
Plans/suggestions will not save Pakistan, but the intentions of Pakistanis to make something out of Jinnah`s dream will. Sadly, the dream is withering away and dying and no one seems to care.
As the French say, ``la farce is jouleé`` in Pakistan.
Interesting ideas for the future well being of Pakistan.....
I tend to be in agreement with some of them, but generally am of the view, as you have articulated, the only viable salvation for Pakistan, is the way forward.
What you have labored and produced is nothing short of a ``mission statement`` or a policy paper to cure the ills of Pakistan. It is here that my biggest problem, with the suggestions, arises.
There is a distint difference in suggesting a road map for Pakistan`s survival and following it diligently. Like all governments before it, this one too will be measured by its` ability to implement it reformist program to better Pakistan. To paraphrase the Americans, ``its the implementation, stupid`` and until that point till we meaningfully do what we say, nothing is going to happen for the better in Pakistan. There are too many options and suggestions on what Pakistan can do and unless we act on those suggestions, plans, programs etc., nothing will happen.
The critical question/problem in Pakistan is not a lack of a political vector or a direction, but whether we, as a nation, want to get where we have to. Pakistan has produced plans/suggestions like yours in ample quantity in the last 53 years and it still has nothing to show for it. Why?
To quote Yeats in refrence to Pakistan,
``a waste of breath seems the years behind
and a waste of breath the years to come,
in balance with life, this death``.
Plans/suggestions will not save Pakistan, but the intentions of Pakistanis to make something out of Jinnah`s dream will. Sadly, the dream is withering away and dying and no one seems to care.
As the French say, ``la farce is jouleé`` in Pakistan.
#323 Posted by Ras Siddiqui on January 19, 2000 6:56:46 pm
Zeemax Rep# 186
Shariati`s best work in translation (in my opinion) is ``Civilization and Modernization``.
As a former student of his work, I regret that
I had to depend on English translations of his
original works in Persian.
But of couse now since the ``Taliban Model`` is
fast becoming the ``Islamic Model`` for Pakistanis,
who wants to read about ``Islamic Enlightenment``
in the footsteps of Sir Syed, Iqbal, Afghani etc.?
Shariati`s works were available from a Texas bookstore at one time, but I now keep reading
many bits and pieces on the web. I would suggest that you search there.
Ras
#322 Posted by temporal on January 19, 2000 5:24:38 pm
Zeemax:
Shariati is in the tradition of Mohammed Abduh, Sir Syed, Iqbal and Pervez. I thought www.shariati.com under BOOKS had some of his writings.
Pervez has a site www.toluislam.com
Am not aware of any for Sir Syed.
As for Iqbal, I know someone associated with a semi official organisation in Lahore was working on setting up a site. It was still under construction last March.
rgds
t
P.S. Now if someone can help me with a search engine. I found it in a top ten list on slate and the name begins with the letter G?
Shariati is in the tradition of Mohammed Abduh, Sir Syed, Iqbal and Pervez. I thought www.shariati.com under BOOKS had some of his writings.
Pervez has a site www.toluislam.com
Am not aware of any for Sir Syed.
As for Iqbal, I know someone associated with a semi official organisation in Lahore was working on setting up a site. It was still under construction last March.
rgds
t
P.S. Now if someone can help me with a search engine. I found it in a top ten list on slate and the name begins with the letter G?
#321 Posted by Amin Saleh on January 18, 2000 7:26:31 am
Fuzair,
I don`t think we should be quick to dismiss Islam in Economics. Just because a few people take a myopic view of Islamic Banking does not necessarily translate into universal truth. Just like saying Islamic architecture is restricted to minaretes or masjids.
I believe the key to understanding Islamic Banking to work will fairness with both borrowers and lenders.
Zeemax
When I said negative interest rates, I was referring to the Yen in Interbank Markets. This has also happened for Swiss Francs in the past.
In my sugar example, I never implied that an expected profit would be offerred. I clearly connected this sugar example with that of the CPI linked bonds. In such bonds CPI does not have a predetermined level (CPI level - ofcourse it has a premium). This premium may be errorenously construed to be the real return. I, on the other hand, would term it to be basis spread between the basket of goods and services of the investor versus those in the CPI. This means if I am an investor and my basket is heavily weighted towards airline tickets, cars and luxury houses and I believe that their prices in usd will be 4% greater than that of the CPI, I will be indifferent if I were to hold CPI linked bonds plus 4% or invest in those goods immediately. It is misleading when people think that the basket of goods and services of investors are the same as other people.
Since it is the governments responsibility to maintain the integrity of the currency, it can only do so if it maintains the purchasing power of the money it issues. In such a case, if it were to borrow goods and services from investors and sell it to raise funds and at maturity buys the same goods and services to pay back its investors it will ensure that it maintains the general price level in the economy at sustainable level.
I have no problems with forward markets. If there is zero interest because of zero inflation as is the case in japan, then forward / futures markets would primarily have the value of future expected demand and supply. I understand that Islam does not have any restriction to such deals also.
I don`t disagree with you that the Shariah courts have no clue about the key concerns of the investors and barter is the way they will go come June 2001.
I don`t think we should be quick to dismiss Islam in Economics. Just because a few people take a myopic view of Islamic Banking does not necessarily translate into universal truth. Just like saying Islamic architecture is restricted to minaretes or masjids.
I believe the key to understanding Islamic Banking to work will fairness with both borrowers and lenders.
Zeemax
When I said negative interest rates, I was referring to the Yen in Interbank Markets. This has also happened for Swiss Francs in the past.
In my sugar example, I never implied that an expected profit would be offerred. I clearly connected this sugar example with that of the CPI linked bonds. In such bonds CPI does not have a predetermined level (CPI level - ofcourse it has a premium). This premium may be errorenously construed to be the real return. I, on the other hand, would term it to be basis spread between the basket of goods and services of the investor versus those in the CPI. This means if I am an investor and my basket is heavily weighted towards airline tickets, cars and luxury houses and I believe that their prices in usd will be 4% greater than that of the CPI, I will be indifferent if I were to hold CPI linked bonds plus 4% or invest in those goods immediately. It is misleading when people think that the basket of goods and services of investors are the same as other people.
Since it is the governments responsibility to maintain the integrity of the currency, it can only do so if it maintains the purchasing power of the money it issues. In such a case, if it were to borrow goods and services from investors and sell it to raise funds and at maturity buys the same goods and services to pay back its investors it will ensure that it maintains the general price level in the economy at sustainable level.
I have no problems with forward markets. If there is zero interest because of zero inflation as is the case in japan, then forward / futures markets would primarily have the value of future expected demand and supply. I understand that Islam does not have any restriction to such deals also.
I don`t disagree with you that the Shariah courts have no clue about the key concerns of the investors and barter is the way they will go come June 2001.
#320 Posted by Amin Saleh on January 17, 2000 5:30:40 am
Zeemax,
Return on Capital in the current economic environment is not just due to the availability of capital but based on risks assumed; inflation, default, economic risks (equity returns), currency, etc.
Currently, the Islamic banking proponents are preoccupied with returns only for economic risks. they would also pay money for default risks in the form of letter of guarantee from banks. but for everything else you would get no return.
Return on Capital in the current economic environment is not just due to the availability of capital but based on risks assumed; inflation, default, economic risks (equity returns), currency, etc.
Currently, the Islamic banking proponents are preoccupied with returns only for economic risks. they would also pay money for default risks in the form of letter of guarantee from banks. but for everything else you would get no return.
#319 Posted by Amin Saleh on January 17, 2000 5:21:24 am
Zeemax,
While I found Dr Aqdas Ali Kazmi article very interesting, I think it would be appropriate to add the following:
1) There are countries where interest rate is not only zero but also negative. For example Japan. So the point is while I agree that all factors of production have a cost attached to it, it is not necessary that the cost has to be different than zero under certain circumstances.
Interest rates are determined based on investors and borrowers view of inflation, default and a combination of the two. So if the borrower feels that the inflation on the goods and services he wishes to acquire will have a higher inflation than that is embedded in the interest rate he will borrow money.
On the other hand, if the investor feels that the inflation will be less than what is implied by the interest rate he will be a willing lender. This assumes that the default risk would be zero.
2) In Islam what needs to be understood is that in a lending or borrowing transaction it is generally accepted that what is lent should be received back without any increase. As such given the current verdict, I forsee the lenders not willing to lend money but goods and services. So I will acquire a kilo of sugar and lend a kilo of sugar. At the end of the loan period I will get a kilo of sugar back. My return will then work out to be the value i bought sugar at, e.g. rs.20 and todays value rs. 22. The return would primarily be due to inflation and demand supply conditions. However, if the demand supply volatility were to be eliminated by creating a basket of goods and commodities similar to the ones used by CPI or PPI, you would create an instrument would be an inflation linked instrument - acceptable under Islam. Now you are not restricted to using CPI or PPI only for debt instruments but you may create custom made baskets.
Banks would continue to intermediate credit risks as is the case currently between depositors and borrowers.
While I found Dr Aqdas Ali Kazmi article very interesting, I think it would be appropriate to add the following:
1) There are countries where interest rate is not only zero but also negative. For example Japan. So the point is while I agree that all factors of production have a cost attached to it, it is not necessary that the cost has to be different than zero under certain circumstances.
Interest rates are determined based on investors and borrowers view of inflation, default and a combination of the two. So if the borrower feels that the inflation on the goods and services he wishes to acquire will have a higher inflation than that is embedded in the interest rate he will borrow money.
On the other hand, if the investor feels that the inflation will be less than what is implied by the interest rate he will be a willing lender. This assumes that the default risk would be zero.
2) In Islam what needs to be understood is that in a lending or borrowing transaction it is generally accepted that what is lent should be received back without any increase. As such given the current verdict, I forsee the lenders not willing to lend money but goods and services. So I will acquire a kilo of sugar and lend a kilo of sugar. At the end of the loan period I will get a kilo of sugar back. My return will then work out to be the value i bought sugar at, e.g. rs.20 and todays value rs. 22. The return would primarily be due to inflation and demand supply conditions. However, if the demand supply volatility were to be eliminated by creating a basket of goods and commodities similar to the ones used by CPI or PPI, you would create an instrument would be an inflation linked instrument - acceptable under Islam. Now you are not restricted to using CPI or PPI only for debt instruments but you may create custom made baskets.
Banks would continue to intermediate credit risks as is the case currently between depositors and borrowers.
#318 Posted by Ras Siddiqui on January 15, 2000 9:24:58 pm
This Washington Post article is worth reading
especially the Mir Waiz comments on the recent
``Hijacking`` at:
http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/2000-01/14/091l-011400-idx.html
Enjoy
Ras
#317 Posted by temporal on January 14, 2000 6:16:50 pm
gymnosophist:
I thought he was a Sindhi, but you could be right. He later migrated to India. Actually, he was hounded out of Pakistan after Jinnah`s death.
Wonder if anyone knows what happened to him?
rgds
t
I thought he was a Sindhi, but you could be right. He later migrated to India. Actually, he was hounded out of Pakistan after Jinnah`s death.
Wonder if anyone knows what happened to him?
rgds
t
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- KHYBER: Instead of arguing,lets put... NRO Is Just a
- HisExcellency: AZ mole diesel.. just... NRO Is Just a
- Ravi_Kopra: What choice? Can any Abdullah,... Crowning of a Crony
- Diesel: punjabi mole hi ex... NRO Is Just a
- HisExcellency: re: Agha Amin wrote: "NRO... NRO Is Just a
- Mr.India: Breaking News: Vajpayee,... The Jehadi Frankenstein
- Mr.India: Vajpayee, Advani pseudo-moderates, Liberhan... The Jehadi Frankenstein
- Diesel: so mulla omar was... Crowning of a Crony
