Muslims and The West After 11th September

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow.asp?art_ID=1477199854

We badly need India`s help, says Lanka

To all my Tamil brothers and sisters who read this -

I have no idea how much help LTTE gets from Tamil Nadu...I have no idea what India can do to help Sri Lanka...1987 debacle is too raw to forget. Sri Lanka became India`s Vietnam. And we lost Rajiv...who was, for all his weaknesses, a good human being.

I recognize that Tamils in Sri Lanka have genuine grivances...perhaps India can help Sri Lanka solve some of the problems between two communities in some peaceful way...may be by offering incentives of trade and in other ways.

But just one day after terrorists have attacked the Parliament building in India - a building deeply sacred to me, and to all of us Indians -, I implore you to do all you can to reconsider ANY kind of assistance, military OR humanitarian, that you suspect might reach LTTE.

A murderer is a murderer is a murderer, even if he is my brother.

Let us all get down to stoping this fukcing stupidity, once and for all.

re: nazis

``abd Jews were the principal victims of that man`s blood-thirst. Only revisionist historians deny that.``

The number of Slavs butchered by the Nazis is much greater than that of Jews. Its a pity, they don`t have a Spielberg equivalent in Hollywood. That said, the Jewish Holocaust in itself was ofcourse quite horrific.

re: indian parliament

Bajpayee and co. in my opinion have gone completely nuts or have been watching too many hindi movies. I think they should try some surgical air strikes and see what happens, or better, drop some special ops folks in Azad Kashmir.

re shah 427

`...group of ppl who from time of shylock has been synonymous with ``stingy``ungratefull & forgetfull `

On such anti-Semitism was Nazism built and the Holoucast fuelled.

Israeli brutality? More Palestinians were slaughtered by Jordanians(with active Pakistani help, I may add)in 1970, the Shiite Amal and Syria in 1983, than in any war by Israel. Israel is a kid when it comes to atrocities. The book on brutality in the Middle East is coauthored by the late Hafiz Asad and Saddam Hussein. Israel should be condemned for its occasional harsh treatment of its Arab citizens but AFTER we condemn the far, far, brutal record of the Arab states.

re: rsridhar #435

...sorry, i didn`t mean to insult you..i was just joking...you`re free to believe whatever you like...again, sorry.

Drumz - Sattar2

Trillium: ``What is the scientific explanation of WHY observation affects particles? Doesn`t that strike at the whole basis of observatory science?``

Interestingly, your posts concerning Issa mythology and question on particle physics bear a fascinating relationship. The Christ stuff refers to the Transcendent Function required to resolve (no-win) paradox. Same is true mathematically. Very symbolic.

I`m fascinated by the direction of your dialogs with Sattar2. Muslim/Christian/Jewish books are `myth`. Myth is not untruth, but psychological truths, constructs of our collective psyche. I also recall you`ve made references to the `non-rational` in former posts. Very important distinction. A feeling is a scientific fact, but of a different `set`.

To answer your question, `why observation affects particles` comes down to a phenomena called `electroweak symmetry` breaking. It`s at the heart of the HUP and still unknown. Known, it would be the Theory of Everything (T.O.E.) One who knew it best was Einstein`s friend, Abdus Salam.

In 1928, determinism in the form of Newtonian physics was seriously upset by the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. At the particle level, matter and energy behaved in a very non-determistic way. It`s also important to note that as you read these words, non-determistic laws are at work in the form of your thoughts and perceptions in brain function. It runs according to the laws of quantum mechanics. Perception itself is a psychological problem.

Subsequent (thought) experiments further seemed to bear out the non-rational nature of the micro world and stirred the scientific community: Schrodinger`s Cat, The Einstein/Podolsky/Rosen experiment (The EPR),Godel and Bell`s Theorem, all FASCINATING support of the HUP.

Yes, the observer changes the outcome of these measurements. We are part of the problem. And yes, it did change the course of observational science. The HUP was so non-rational, yet undeniable, that the scientific community agreed that this `open end` would be housed in a declaration called the Copenhagen Interpretation (of Quantum Mechanics). The essential controversial features of the Copenhagen Interpretation are (1) the Uncertainty Principle (also called the Indeterminacy Principle) of Heisenberg and (2) the Principle of (wave and particle) Complementarity of Bohr. With the passage of time the Copenhagen Interpretation has been more specifically identified with a concept known as ``the collapse of the wave function``. Ironically, the foremost scientist involved with this facet of `electroweak symmetry`, was again, Abdus Salam.

There was also a brilliant Nobeller, (drumz variety) boy-genius, friend of Einstein, named Wolfgang Pauli. At 21 years of age he shaped Einstein`s theories into a 237 page work which has never been equaled. He later received the Nobel for his famous Pauli Exclusion Principle - at 25 years of age. At the death of his mother, a suicide, he denounced the Catholic faith, divorced and began to drink heavily. He sought out the famous psychologist, Carl Jung, a meeting which ultimately promised to be the collaboration of science and religion. It was Jung who formalized the archetypes, among those you pointed out were Jesus - `Sun` of God, etc. Their collaboration resulted in the combined publication of Jung`s treatise on synchronicity and Pauli`s essay on archetypal ideas influencing Kepler`s writings in ``The Interpretation of Nature and the Psyche``. Over time, their correspondence shaped and reshaped their understanding of the principle they called `synchronicity`, a term Jung had suggested earlier. A new book, ``ATom and Archetype``(Princeton Univ. Press 2001), outlines their correspondence. (http://pup.princeton.edu/titles/7042.html)

All the HUP stuff drove Einstein nuts and he insisted until his death that there were mysterious ``hidden variables`` at work. It also prompted his famous statement, ``God does not play dice with the universe..``

He died at Princeton Hospital uttering something in German. Unfortunately, the attending nurse didn`t understand the language. Personally, I think it was something like,

``Fu(king Heisenberg...``

Today, the HUP still stands.

Jung was a decent scientist and believed that these archetypes(symbols) activated in the collective psyche and produced paradigm shifts - i.e., the sudden rise and impact of Hitler and Nazi Germany. With that in mind, the recent developments with UBL and the Muslim religion would suggest that such an `archetype` has been activated in the collective psyche. There was also such a phenomena during the crusades. I`m researching it now.

This is the stuff of a VERY important field which had basically had stopped at Pauli`s untimely death in the 50`s (and Abdus Salam). It was REAL science approaching religion. Jung had scientifically proven the existence of the collective unconscious. Pauli`s premature death cost Jung an associate who in fact was ``prepared to do the mathematical proofs``.

Sorry I can`t do this stuff justice for you. The concepts are too monstrous. Like the two part HUP - the problem is truth vs. clarity. The more I simplify these concepts truth suffers. The more technical you get, clarity suffers. That`s the Heisenberg. I`d welcome some input. Can`t imagine discussing science on Hoodboy`s dime;)

Sattar: I agree, Paul was a fraud if there ever was one. Most of the symbolism regarding Jesus was including in Christianity in Nicene (325 ad). They modelled his life after Mithra and horus (among others) - to make conversion easier. The dates they picked were a straight give away. Dec. 21 is the winter solstice. The days of the sun increase after that. On the 21st, the sun`s light decreases a lot, it then comes back up on the 25th (Jesus died on the cross, went to ``hell`` for three days and came back up on the 25th). He died on SUN rise on SUNday - no coincedence (when the sun CROSSes the horizon (hamzad, does Horizon come from ``horus?)`` He came to jerusalem on a donkey (in babylon that symbol was the sign of Cancer - when the sun is at its highest. There were SOOO many people born to virgins, who were called the Son of God, crucified etc etc. There`s nothing new under the sun -as solomon said - its all been done before... Early pictures of Jesus showed him riding the sun, under the inscription ``jesus, SUN (not son) of righteousness.`` They say that all the kids were killed in Jesus` villiage -when he was birthed - yet there is NO evidence for this, just like there`s no evidence of jews being enslaved in egypt. Somethin`s UP.

The question is: where does this put Islam`s credibility if they believe Jesus was born of a virgin etc...?

Hobby: The things I take seriously in life can be counted on one hand. Genocide in one of them, there`s nothing gentle about it. Look how clearly this sh1t has been explained. Point form, numbers, capitals and people STILL dont get it...

Damn I miss my weed!!

Re: Rsridhar #435

``...You cannot fake materialising a big statue right in front of you as he did to my brother in law`s cousin...``

I was a skeptic of the Baba (thinking about the Las Vegas performers, etc.), but the moment I read the above statement, I was converted. I did not even bother to read the rest of your post, but now, I reassure you, I am a huge Baba devotee. I am now going to ensure that my circle of friends and relatives are likewise persuaded when I tell them that my Chowk buddy (whom I know by a username, have never met, and possibly never will) has a brother-in-law, whose cousin saw nothing one moment, and a big statue in the next one. That, I will them is a miracle and the only logical conclusion left for them to reach is to become a Baba devotee. When they have been ably persuaded, I will sign up for a time share at the Baba`s ashram, and distance myself from this material world, while the Baba figures out a way to invest some of life earnings...See you there.

BTW, faxes and phones operate on the basis of tiny man-made objects known as transistors and capacitors, which operate on the basis of quantum mechanics, which was discovered by...

Tahmed

Clearly, we are talking past one another. In the context of Dr. Hoodbhoy`s article, ``Secular humanism`` is not a dictionary definition of two words - but rather a doctrine, a philosophy, a set of values, how could it be otherwise.

Of course I realized that you are not aware of the true meaning of ``secular humanism`` - as indeed so many others who endorsed Dr. hoodbhoy`s call were unaware; which is why I have repeatedly asked for whose who who endsored this call to explain their poistion and understanding of this ``secular humanism``. Yes, I did understand that who did endorse such a call were acting of their sense reason, their values of egalitarianism, of social justice - yet, Dr. Hoodbhoy does not call for reference to Tahmed, or Dost`s or Hobbyty`s sensibilities and values but to that of ``secular humanism``. We had discussed ``unrestricted self`` earlier and I trust you see how ``secular humanism`` fits into that persepective. Just as we would be ``Self`` righteous, when we would be refering to a set of ethical and moral values derived by and for ourselves, to apply to the world, we would be in error, to fail to recognize ``secular humanism`` as anything other than what it is, when we seek to give it a meaning it inherently does not have.

I posted my response to the individuals, (including you) as a measure of the trust I have, knowing you will evaluate the idea - not me - the ideas. As for me, I know where I stand and have made it clear to all - and justified my position - and have helped others who may not have been aware of what Dr. Hoodbhoy was calling for, to at least have the knowledge to reason for themselves.

As to whether Quran is humanist - to the degree that it requires man to gain knowledge and is about the welfare of man, yes, it can be said to be humanistic to that limit - but not any further than that - it is God centered - not man centered - it is about the ``self``, the individual, realizing himself/herself in relation to the group and not the individual alone in the universe.

Is it secular? certainly it can be argued and Sorush does argue it, that it contains, can be interpretated as, calling for a secularizing (a process, if it can be appreciated as ``worldly``).

Yet, once again, let us clear, and it would be disenginuous of us to not admit - this is far from what dr. Hoodbhoy calls for in his article.

Re: Amit

``...However, I think Musharraf is too smart to order a bombing of the Indian parliament in the current environment…``

OK - let us grant you that. Can you also categorically state that he takes NO ACTION WHATSOEVER to deter the same organizations from infiltrating into India? Ordering and tolerating such organizations may be two different things, but for the recipient of that violence the injury is the same.

``…For Musharraf, it is an embarrasment and it causes further discomfort with respect to US. The people who really gain are the LeT and Jaish,…``

OK - let us again grant you that. So, Musharraf is not embarrassed by the less publicized killings of ordinary citizens that occur routinely? Or is it the case that he does not fully control his own agencies and their proteges (although recent evidence suggests that he completely squelched the religious right in Pakistan despite heavy loss of life of ordinary Pakistanis in Afghanistan)? If the latter, then why should India continue to deal with Musharraf, and not directly with the proteges and their mentors, in a manner it finds appropriate?

``…Secondly we must seal our borders with Pakistan….``

Virtually impossible - especially the Indo-Nepal/ Indo-Bangla border. You have NO idea of the geography of India`s border areas vis a vis the 38th parallel in N./S. Korea. Besides, sealing the border is not going to change Musharaff (or the antagonists`) mindset one iota. It could still be attempted, but do not bet the farm on it.

``This is something where we can leverage US support….We could convince the US to chip in some measure as well…This would win instant support from the US…``

Yeah, bring `em on. But again, don`t wait for miracles. This is an Indian problem to be solved by Indians primarily. On second thoughts, waiting for the nirvana of Pax Americana, eh? After 200 years of Pax Britannica, I do not relish the thought.

``…On the political front, we could offer state assembly elections under UN supervision….``

What is wrong with conducting elections under President`s Rule first (i.e. not the National Conference)? Will the UN supervisors include members from Burkina Faso, Liberia, Nigeria, Zimbabwe, Cuba, China, and other stalwarts of democracy? But seriously, the issue is whether or not to conduct elections under the Indian Constitution. It is not an issue of who the electoral officers report to, but rather the legal framework in which they are conducted. Those who violently oppose the Indian Constitution and deter voters to stay away from polling stations will continue to do even with UN monitors.

Second, your assertion ``Pakistan would not be able to oppose it given the UN dimension…`` has been proven wrong once in Afghanistan, and once in Kashmir. Pakistan did oppose the 1992 Afghan Govt. and nearly drove the Northern Alliance to extinction through the Taleban. In Kashmir, the existing UN resolutions cannot be implemented until PAKISTAN WITHDRAWS FIRST. There is no similar requirement on India. I hope that you do not belong to a group of wishful thinkers who believe that pieces of parchment are enough to enforce agreements in international relations. I wish it was the case, but it is not.

``…We can organize targeted covert action in Pakistan against the LeT and Jaish…``

Without the assent of the government of Pakistan? No way. That is not a cure - it will cause only a temporary disruption of operations, before the organizations spring back again with renewed vigor. This is the responsibility of the government of Pakistan, not India`s.

``…tax breaks…reservations…``

Won`t solve a thing

Re:Reply #: 424

RSaxena,

It requires some kind of spiritual evolution to believe in God and saints, not just because your mama has told you since you were born but because you learn it experiantially.

I was more or less an atheist. Growing up in Delhi in a materialistic enviornment does not allow one to think of God for long. It is only in the last 2 or 3 years that event that happened to me personally have made sea change in my thinking. It is typically a western mindset that rejects miracles as beyond logic.

Saxena, We live in an age of miracles. Everything happening around us: faxes, T.V, Computers etc are miracles. They are all based on the basis premise that everything in this world is non-material. If you are able to talk to your loved ones in India, it is because of the conversion of sound waves to electical waves on one end and the reverse on the other end, both being in the realm of a non-material world. Every new discovery or invention that scientists declare is based on this basic premise: that what we see is not what it is.

In light of above facts, miracles become not just possible but even plausible. Saints and prophets can perform these miracles because they operate at a different level, which is non-material.

Cheap tricksters and magicians operate for a motive: making money or fame or both.They also make use of illusions and deceptions and need a trick of hand here and a wave there in order to lure your concentration and do their trick. If you ask them, there is always a simple explanation of how they did it. Baba operates on a different plane. No one has ever proved anything though a lot of claims have been made about his faking these things. You cannot fake materialising a big statue right in front of you as he did to my brother in law`s cousin. One moment it was not there and next moment it is there. Skeptic mind does not believe it. How can this happen, we wonder? Science cannot explain it either but then if someone had told that there are micro-organisms that eyes cannot see before Leewenhock discovered microscope powerful enough to see them, he would have been considered a lunatic. Baba`s materialisations and other miracles happen instantaneoulsy, without any planning. If he materialised a ring for someone, it is excatly how that person had wanted and fit him perfectly. Bhagavantam was his close associate and also a Scientific advisor to GOI in the 50s. Baba materialised Bhagawat Geeta, a large book right in front of him out of nowhere.

These things are hard to understand. I have often tried to brush them away but it is what i see that matters. I have seen enough to convince that i am dealing with a real saint here, one with miraculous powers.

I have known Baba for only 3 years now. I have visited his Ashram only twice. What i see is amazing. He has built schools upto higher secondary level. He has also, with the help of devotees, built colleges for higher learning. Education upto college level is free. I saw a superspeciality hospital, where doctors from all over the world come and offer free services. Heart operations like Bypass are done free of cost here.

Greatest proof of his saintly nature is the way he affects many people and his own exemplary life which is spartan and saintly.

Many of his former devotees who felt rejected when they fell out of favor (for their own faults)with him have been writing a lot of non-sense, especially on the web. Many of these names are Western but many westerners have assumed Indian names and have been writing some trash about him. There are also many disillusioned Indians out there, disillusioned because they go to Baba for instant cure and when they do not get it, they accuse him. He is not here for any instant gratification of our desires. He tries to give us a way out of our mess. His teachings are spiritual. He welcomes people from all religion and reinforces there believes in their respective religions. So, a christian goes back as a better christian. Because he deals with hindus in large numbers, a lot of his teaching deal with hinduism. He has often been accused of proseletysing though without any proof. He does nothing like that.

It only goes to show that all that you read on web is not true. One such guy was a piano player from U.K. When he fell out of favor, he lashed out at Baba. Baba is not affected. He does not have to answer to anyone. He does not compel anyone to come to him.

A swedish parapsychologist (working in USA) has written a book about him (i do not recall the name but i will post it in my next post). Baba allowed him free access. This book is about his observations. This man was totally changed after several interviews and witnessed many miracles. However, baba refused to do miracles on author`s insistence saying that his miracles have a higher purpose and not just to satisfy one`s curiosity.

Western Churches and Clergy feel threatened by such a figure. Many are trying to malign him. To that list belongs one Tim Robertson. He ones a T.V channel, is a multi-millionaire American and freely dabbles in politics and while praying pretends he can converse with God. He however has a huge Christian following. His one goal is to convert heathrens in India (as he calls them) to christianity. If you read his books, he is particularly severe on Baba. He acknowledges that Baba has strange poweres but feels that baba is dabbling in black majic.

So, my dear Sir, We live in a strange world where there is duality everywhere. You make your pick has to what you believe in. I will end my long post with one more good things that Baba`s Associations the world over have been doing viz Education in Human Values or EHV. Through a number of schools for children called Bal Vikas Kendras children are taught how to pray, self help skills, meditation, yoga apart from other school curricula. This has had exemplary effect on these children who will one day grow out to be better individuals, respecting all religions, respecting human life.

I am posting this long post in response to your remarks. This will be my last post on the subject and i do not intend to reply to some other trash being said about him by others. I hope Chowki wallahs will spare me the pain of reading such trash. Do people not have better things to do than degrade someone just because there are webpages out there that support their line of thinking? To those who are skeptics, do what Karanjia of Blitz did many years ago to satisfy his curiosity. Go and visit Puttaparthi. It may change your life as it did Karanjia`s (Karanjia was a known atheist and editor of Blitz in Bombay and regularly wrote columns against him. He went once to meet him and came out of the interview a completely changed man).

Sridhar

ref: amit #428

Two questions: Why is undertaking any action against Pakistan the same as destabilizing it? Secondly, why is the only option to destabilizing Pres. Musharraf having to deal with a talibanized Pakistan?

In any case it seems that there is a high probability that power is already slipping out of Gen. Musharraf`s hands. The complete disappearance of Mullah Omar and his top commanders is quite mysterious. And if India`s story about the ISI planning the strike on the Indian Parliament has any accuracy, it probably goes to show that despite the change of leadership, that agency is not completely under the General`s control.

As far as India is concerned, the Govt. should collect all the evidence and present it before the Indian public and the international media. If the evidence is indeed compelling, I would strongly support any action against Pakistan, overt, covert or both.

For too long we have beleived that a prosperous and stable Pakistan was in India`s interests. That myth needs to be re-examined. I think India stands to gain a lot if Pakistan were somehow to collapse under its own internal contradictions into small but stable components.

-narain

hobbyty #421 Thanks for directing me to the specific doctrine ``secular humanism`` which you indicate, is really a doctrine of something else (sexual perversity and atheism, as you indicate and I will assume you are being accurate when you advise me of this). This then would be a doctrine something that most people (and I am among them) are not familiar with. Nor are most people (and I among them) interested in persuing further: it is only of academic interest given that we DONT have ``Atheist Terrorists`` nor are there any ``Plane Hijackers for the Liberation of Sexual Perversity``. Therefore, as a muslim, other people`s beliefs are not my business (as long as they dont use their beliefs to threaten the lives of other people).

Secular humanism, to use the straightforward meaning of the term, is obviously something totally different, and one that is totally consistent with the Quranic message of respect for all faiths and the central importance of being a good human being.

In view of the above, why do you choose to use such an inaccurate term? Or do you seriously think secularism and humanism (to use the straightforward meaning of the term as I described earlier, which is part of the CORE Quranic message) is the same thing as ``Atheistic Sexual Perversity``? If you do, then you would in the same category as the countless mullahs of Pakistan, and I think you are more educated and a better human being than them.

anNy #416 Eid Mubarak to you and yours too. We had a very good Eid here, half way round the world from Pakistan - good friends, good food, nice only slightly chilly December day (global warming?). Reached prayer place at last possible minute (deja vu), listened to usual vacuous stuff from the mullah who chose to give a speech on man`s love for God which I found uninspiring and off-base at a time when we should be concerned about the importance of living in peace and love with our fellow-man.

As for the attack on the Indian parliament, I think it is time people in Pakistan said enough and kicked these Islamists out of our hair (to mix metaphors). As I said in response to shammi, who cares about proof - why should we tolerate violent groups of any kind to begin with and why should these Islamist groups not be treated as the bandits that they are. These individuals are are incapable and/or unwilling to earn an honest living, and would therefore drag society down to their level. As a Pakistani I am outraged that it is because of these Islamists that most people in India and many Afghans see Pakistan (not without reason) as a source of their problems rather than as a resource to help solve their problems, like a good neighbor.

Amit,

I have no idea how a post I sent in reply to Stuka on Feroz`s board got lost travelling between my computer and the cyberworld that Chowk inhabits. It did contain some ideas relevant to what you wrote. I am re-sending that post (or a close version of it...I think).

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Alright, Stuka, let me go over this. I hope you will see that there are no contradictions between what I suggested and what you (and anNy) wrote, except that my post also draws attention to some basic problems that your argument overlooks. IMO your argument is not wrong, just incomplete; and if Pakistan (or, for that matter, India) is to come out of this sorry mess, for God`s sake, truths, even if hard, have to be faced...Otherwise, there is NO hope of things getting better. We should rather tell/listen to the truth and, if wrong, be ready to correct ourselves, than be mealy-mouthed and weak-hearted about these things.

Before taking up my post # 206 let me state my opinion on some things -

1. I do NOT for a moment believe or suggest that Musharraf was in any way involved with or had any knowledge of this attack.

2. I do NOT believe that any Pakistani agencies were directly involved in this either.

3. I do believe that, most likely, the attack was carried out by a group that is not fully under the control of, or whose activities are not fully coordinated by, Pakistani agencies. Their purpose could be to hurt India, Pakistan, or both. If you want to call them `rouge` groups, I have no problem with that except that that will be avoiding a major issue - one that is the source of many of these problems in the first place.

My contention is that we can discuss those real issues, and THEN be optimistic and confident, rather than brush things under the carpet and pray to God that the situation will somehow turn around because some hero of ours is a nice guy. Now, let us consider # 206.

Doctrine of distance and deniability

``Musharraf brushed aside questions about whether he would rein in armed Islamic groups that support fighters in Kashmir, insisting that

the Kashmiri insurgency is ``indigenous``. (1)

``An open policy toward jihad in Kashmir by the new military-led government of Pakistan has emboldened Lashkar. The group boasts 2,500 recruiting offices in Pakistan and reportedly trains more than 40,000 men a year in guerrilla warfare and infiltration tactics`` (2)

``A few years ago no one talked of jihad, and my friends weren`t interested,`` says Islami. ``But now I definitely expect it to intensify. There is a lot more talk about it, and weapons are much more available.`` (3)

``Pakistan`s new chief executive] Gen. Musharraf says there is only one point to make - Kashmir. We agree,`` Lashkar-e-Toiba (4)

``Vajpayee`s throat will be cut in front of Lal Qila (Red Fort Dehli), Bal Thakrey will be dragged in Pattiyala, and Advani will be broken into pieces in Amritsar.`` (5)

``The Musharraf model seeks to covertly ally with the jehadi groups while overtly keeping the mainstream religious parties out of the power loop. This is to enhance and sustain its covert external agenda, while internally maintaining an overtly moderate anti fundamentalist stance for the comfort of the international community whose economic support is critical to Pakistan’s financial viability.`` (6)

``For years, successive governments have been denying military support for Kashmiri militants while jehadi outfits have been openly collecting funds to buy arms and train infiltrators at camps established in Punjab and Azad Kashmir. In these efforts, these groups have received more than a wink and a nod from shadowy agencies that have sought to keep the Kashmir pot on the boil while preserving official deniability.`` (7)

``Hard think on the total deniability policy is required. After all increased Mujahideen political and guerilla activity will be necessary to force India to address the Kashmir question.`` (8)

I can provide scores of additional examples and references to ``further open`` the open secret that Pakistan has tried to follow a policy of ``plausible deniability`` in both Afghanistan and Kashmir.

In a technical sense -

Plausible deniability refer(s) to the security properties of a mechanism that allows parties to claim to others (e.g. a judge) that some information is not in their possession, or that some transaction has not taken place (9)

Pakistani authorities have sought to actively engage themselves in the affairs of Afghanistan and Indian Kashmir while claiming that they have no information about the training and funding of international terrorists within Pakistani borders, and that no such training camps even exist - a piece of fiction that nobody believes.

As McDonald and Kuhn (2000) point out, schemes of plausible deniability work only for SHORT MESSAGES! That has been the basic problem - what could have been an effective short-term tactic, Pakistani leaders have tried to turn into a life-long strategy, and that just doesnt work...No wonder Pakistanis get so mad and upset that nobody believes them.

If one wants to help Pakistan, then one has to face this real credibility problem created by the messed up policies of past leaders. No point in running away from it, just to feel good for a day or two, or even a year.

That was the traditional ``doctrine of deniability``, which is well-understood. By the doctrine of distance and deniability, however, I implied far more. I wrote -

``Musharraf provides them with moral and political support. He winks at the activities of those of his supporters who read his moral and political support as a clear green light to supporting and funding the supporters, financiars, and planners of terrorists.``

I am suggesting a hierarchical, fragmented system, in which the apex is far removed from the operational nitty-gritty at the bottom; and the relationship between the top and the bottom is mediated by multiple intervening leyers, thus by no means seamless. There is a huge amount of autonomy at the bottom, which offers both systemic advantages (increased deniability) and disadvantages (decreased control).

So the Lashkar-e- Toiba man standing in Muridke feel energized and emboldened to think that Musharraf (rather than say, Nawaz Sharif) is at the helm of affairs in Pakistan, even though there is no communication between the two. Musharraf, on his part, has nothing to do with how the Lashkar man goes about doing his job, or even what job the latter does, except that he (1) propounds and defends ``Jihad`` and (2) supports someone who supports someone else who then supports the supporter of the Laskhar character.

Under such diffused and distanced arrangements, the Lashkar fellow will invariably do a great many things that Musharraf might not have on his own agenda. That in itself does not make Mr. L (our Lashkar man) a rogue. Mr. L will be a rogue ONLY if he goes against CLEARLY ARTICULATED wishes, demands, and policies of Musharraf, and (2) Musharraf actively seeks to punish (crack down on, in anNy`s terms) Mr. L for his transgression. If that doesnt happen, if there is a continued effort ot deny and defend, then Mr. L is by no means a rogue...just a natural part of the fragmented system.

What all this means is that in order to get out of the rat hole (sorry, that is what it is), Musharraf has to -

1. lay out CLEAR policy - basic rules of behavior that NOBODY will be allowed to violate. That is all the more important because, as I showed earlier, Musharraf himself has been in bed with Jihadis until recently. Better to recognize that and deal with it honestly, if the good of Pakistan is what we are after.

2. recognize that just because Musharraf doesnt want to play the Jihadi game now (or, not anymore), that doesn`t mean that Jihadi groups at the bottom wont want to either. So be EXTRA ALERT for ``rogue`` behavior even after the new policy has been CLEARLY articulated and communicated.

3. actively ENFORCE that policy - that is, when there are suspicions of violations, INVESTIGATE, SEEK and PUNISH.

4. recognize that a policy change implies that he may have a whole NEW SET OF ALLIES. Among these new allies will be all decent Pakistanis and Indians who anyways are far far closer to each other than they are to the fringe elements of their own so-called societies. Genuinely REACH OUT to these new and potential allies.

Finally, I do agree that India should give Musharraf a chance to prove that he means business now. As an Indian, I must confess, it is not easy to trust to him. But then, this is the best time for Musharraf to do whatever he wants to do. Jihadis are most discredited. Their tall tales of conquering America and flying Pakistani flags on the Red Fort have turned them into universal laughing stocks, even if demented and dangerous. Musharraf enjoys more power than Pakistani any leader in recent memory. Most important, if Musharraf has really changed his long-term policy and vision, then for the first time in many years, India and Pakistan have exactly the same interest in getting rid of these Jihadi groups...that are so terribly harming both nations.

anNy is right again: if Musharraf fails to act now, it may be too late. He is one hell of an intelligent guy. I hope he also has the vision to do what he must to turn things around.

(1) Pamela Constable, writing in the Washington Post just before the Musharraf Agra visit.

(2, 3, 4) Kashmir dispute as a jihad: Pakistan`s open support of `holy war` emboldens a new cadre of militants. Christian Science Monitor; Boston, Mass.; Mar 6, 2000.

(5) Professor Hafiz Muhammad Saeed of Markaz Ad-Dawa Wal Irshad Lashkar-e-Taiba.`` http://www.markazdawa.org/English/newsandmedia/NEWS/ENGLISH/may2001/may2001.htm

(6) Najam Sethi, the distinguished Editor, wrote in the ``Friday Times`` ( May 18 to 24,2001)

(7) Mazdak http://www.dawn.com/weekly/mazdak/20010303.htm

(8) Nasim Zahra http://www.defencejournal.com/sept99/post-kargil.htm



(9) Roe, Michael. Cryptography and Evidence. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Cambridge, 1997

(10) McDonald, Andew, and Kuhn, Markus. StegFS: A steganographic File System for Linux. A Fitzmann (ed.): IH `99. LNCS 1768, 463-477, 2000

Re: Tahmed321

``...his is not only the right thing to do, it is also in the self interest of Pakistan as well...``

I do hope that better wisdom prevails on both sides than simply ratcheting tension. The elites in both countries owe their people a better future. That future does not lie in violence or in submitting to it. War is not good.

Amit #428
Its ridiculous to presume that the government of Pakistan is in so much trouble that someone held a gun to Brig. Qureshi`s head to issue statements on national television blaming India for the incident.