Filtered Posts

Brahmin and Mullah

Hey Ram, What Have You Done to My Religion? Muslims in non-Muslim majority areas always believe that they are a state within a state and a society within a society.

Hey Ram, What Have You Done to My Religion? Some uncivil home truths
`The State shall endeavour to secure the citizens a Uniform Civil Code throughout the territory of India` Article 44 of Indian Constitution.

`When social good so demanded, the State has not only the right to legislate, but a duty to do so... Muslim personal law was sacrosanct only to the extent it pertained to a man`s manner of worship, his faith, his religious tenets ...But in the matter of other social laws, there is nothing sacrosanct about Muslim personal law. My view is when you have a secular State, no social legislation must be confined to a section of the people.` ...`In secular India, everyone should have equal rights and polygamy should be abolished` Mohammad Carimchand Chagla, eminent jurist.

`One law of marriage for all would be an important step towards national integration` Justice Y.V.Chandrachud

`Muslims in non-Muslim majority areas always believe that they are a state within a state and a society within a society. Islamic personal law runs contrary to the modern notions of human rights. Its anomalies are obvious to anyone except Muslim males` Hamid Dalwai in his book Muslim Politics In India.

`The Muslim Personal Law is a bunch of interpretations and traditions compiled by a group of Maulawis at the instance of Lord Macaulay` Rafique Zakaria in his book The Widening Divide.

`...Muslim women are entitled to a fair treatment along with their Hindu and Christian sisters. This necessarily implies that in regard to matrimonial and inheritance laws there should be a certain measure of uniformity and equality. This can be achieved only through a Uniform Civil Code` V.R.Krishna Iyer

One can go on and on and probably wind up with the most recent reminder, the third in fifteen years, by the Supreme Court to the powers that be to give effect to the constitutional sanction for Uniform Civil Code under the Article 44. Such regular reminders have become necessary because all rulers of post- independence India have perpetually been under the influence of a potent dope called `Secular Ecstasy`, that neutralises one`s concern for the nation`s integrity and its majority population even while enhancing euphoric indulgence towards the minorities at the expense of the former! Sane voices and even `loud legal notices` as above invariably fall on deaf ears guided by mute minds.

There are of course other voices that the spineless rulers of India have always heard with alarming clarity and heeded with god-speed. These voices that had successfully stalled the implementation of the Uniform Civil Code all these years are back now, at their vintage best, unchanged by the passage of time or advance of civilisation. Here goes the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, which claims to be the sole voice of Muslims and the `final adjudicator` of all laws governing them: ` ...nothing should be imposed in any matter concerning religion`. That`s it! And the spokesperson of the Delhi Catholic Archdiocese has warned that `the religious sentiments of any faith are not hurt`. And we all know how strong and sacrosanct their religious sentiments are to them no matter even if they infringe on the rights of the larger mass of humanity outside their faith or impinge on tenets of equity and natural justice. Rest assured, only these voices will again rise above the din and prevail! Article 44s and SC wake-up calls can wait.

The Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act 1937 was passed by the British government to ensure that the Muslims were insulated from common law and that only their personal law would be applicable to them. Every religion had its personal laws which typically dealt with matters concerning marriage, divorce, inheritance, succession, adoption and such other societal matters. So there were also Hindu personal laws based on its Dharma shastras which were also converted into enactments during the British period at various times. The Hindu personal laws varied from one area to another and also depended on the differing religious practices of the various Hindu sects. But the post-independent secular era brought with it several double-standards that now form the core of the current stark social imbalance between different faiths warranting the debate on Uniform Civil Code. Though the framers of the Indian constitution were granted the powers to amend any law that was `in force` at the time of Independence, it was only the personal laws of the Hindus that were subjected to such scrutiny and then altered. The Hindu code Bill brought by Jawaharlal Nehru in mid 1950s, sought to codify and unify the various Hindu social laws under one nomenclature. This was opposed by the Hindus generally and the President Rajendra Prasad declined to give sanction to that Bill. So, the very secular rulers promptly split the Bills (Hindu marriages Act, Hindu inheritance Act, Hindu Divorce Act et al) which were all duly passed. But the Muslim Personal law remained untouched barring a few changes in deference to evolving legal grammar. The pumpkin was quietly buried under secular rice!

Minority champions have always proclaimed that a uniform civil code would be acceptable only if the move came from them. That is they hold the veto, no matter if the Constitution itself ordains it. But no such concession was bestowed on the hapless Hindus of the Nehruvian era; no referendum as is demanded now was taken about the Hindu views. The move did not come from the Hindus but was thrust from above. Yet the mute majority of this land had swallowed it all in the interest of social and communal harmony and even more specifically, out of their genetically ingrained spontaneous respect for rule of law. Now, to contrast this with the intransigence of the minority champions and their secular backers will only add to the pain. But that is nothing when compared to the social inequities that the hands-off-personal-law-policy has set off.

For one, while the Hindu Bigamy act ensures that a Hindu has only one wife, no such restrictions bother the Muslims, who can have upto four wives. More wives automatically mean more children. And combined with their religious distaste for family planning, which the Hindus religiously follow in due deference to the government rules, one can guesstimate the havoc that is going to be caused to the demography of the country. But the secular Hindus should not be concerned about this. Not that they are awaiting an amendment that would allow them too to gather spouses by the dozens and swell their flock but it would indeed be a tragic irony if they were to pay for their social evolution, while those who wantonly court backwardness move forward by way of political and every other kind of domination. Similar perversions pervade other aspects like inheritance, maintenance, succession, probation of wills etc, etc and in every case, the Muslims are at a significant social advantage over their Hindu `fellow citizens`, courtesy their Personal Laws. The list is inexhaustible and warrants a great excursion into the legal bylanes.

But forget the Hindu angle. What about modern concepts of social justice and equality before law? Even in totalitarian Muslim regimes around the world the personal laws are being amended in tune with modern times, but secular India remains cursed to linger in medieval mindset of the Aurangazeb era. Not that there are no pressures on them, from outside and within, but the Muslim clergy had always succeeded in resisting changes under the pretext that it would mean Hinduisation of Muslims and infringement of their religious rights. But does not succumbing to such threats and intimidations reflect on the capacity of a `secular` government to render justice to `secular` citizens of a `secular` country with a `secular` Constitution?

Indeed, it is secularism at its uncivil worst!

Hey Ram, What Have You Done to My Religion? Challenging the Qur’an

http://www.msnbc.com/news/940974.asp

A German scholar contends that the Islamic text has been mistranscribed and promises raisins, not virgins

By Stefan Theil
NEWSWEEK INTERNATIONAL

July 28 issue — In a note of encouragement to his fellow hijackers, September 11 ringleader Muhammad Atta cheered their impending “marriage in Paradise” to the 72 wide-eyed virgins the Qur’an promises to the departed faithful. Palestinian newspapers have been known to describe the death of a suicide bomber as a “wedding to the black-eyed in eternal Paradise.” But if a German expert on Middle Eastern languages is correct, these hopes of sexual reward in the afterlife are based on a terrible misunderstanding.


ARGUING THAT TODAY’S version of the Qur’an has been mistranscribed from the original text, scholar Christoph Luxenberg says that what are described as “houris” with “swelling breasts” refer to nothing more than “white raisins” and “juicy fruits.”
Luxenberg—a pseudonym—is one of a small but growing group of scholars, most of them working in non-Muslim countries, studying the language and history of the Qur’an. When his new book is published this fall, it’s likely to be the most far-reaching scholarly commentary on the Qur’an’s early genesis, taking this infant discipline far into uncharted—and highly controversial—territory. That’s because Islamic orthodoxy considers the holy book to be the verbatim revelation of Allah, speaking to his prophet, Muhammad, through the Angel Gabriel, in Arabic. Therefore, critical study of God’s undiluted word has been off-limits in much of the Islamic world. (For the same reason, translations of the Qur’an are never considered authentic.) Islamic scholars who have dared ignore this taboo have often found themselves labeled heretics and targeted with death threats and violence. Luxenberg, a professor of Semitic languages at one of Germany’s leading universities, has chosen to remain anonymous because he fears a fatwa by enraged Islamic extremists.
Luxenberg’s chief hypothesis is that the original language of the Qur’an was not Arabic but something closer to Aramaic. He says the copy of the Qur’an used today is a mistranscription of the original text from Muhammad’s time, which according to Islamic tradition was destroyed by the third caliph, Osman, in the seventh century. But Arabic did not turn up as a written language until 150 years after Muhammad’s death, and most learned Arabs at that time spoke a version of Aramaic. Rereading the Paradise passage in Aramaic, the mysterious houris turn into raisins and fruit—much more common components of the Paradise myth.
The forthcoming book contains plenty of other bombshells. It claims that the Qur’an’s commandment for women to cover themselves is based on a similar misreading; in Sura 24, the verse that calls for women to “snap their scarves over their bags” becomes in Aramaic “snap their belts around their waists.” Even more explosive are readings that strengthen scholars’ views that the Qur’an had Christian origins. Sura 33 calls Muhammad the “seal of the prophets,” taken to mean the final and ultimate prophet of God. But an Aramaic reading, says Luxenberg, turns Muhammad into a “witness of the prophets”—i.e., someone who bears witness to the established Judeo-Christian texts. The Qur’an, in Arabic, talks about the “revelation” of Allah, but in Aramaic that term turns into “teaching” of the ancient Scriptures. The original Qur’an, Luxenberg contends, was in fact a Christian liturgical document—before an expanding Arab empire turned Muhammad’s teachings into the basis for its new religion long after the Prophet’s death.

Such interpretations will undoubtedly draw the ire of many Muslims—and not just extremists. After all, revisionist scholars have been persecuted for much less; in 2001, Egypt’s Constitutional Court confirmed the “apostasy” of former University of Cairo scholar Nasr Hamid Abu-Zayd, for considering the Qur’an a document written by humans.
Still, Luxenberg may be ushering in a whole new era of Qur’anic study. “Luxenberg’s findings are very relevant and convincing,” says Mondher Sfar, a Tunisian specialist on the historic origins of the Qur’an in exile in Paris. “They make possible a new interpretation of the Qur’an.” In the West, questioning the literal veracity of the Bible was a crucial step in breaking the church’s grip on power—and in developing a modern, secular society. That experience, as much as the questioning itself, is no doubt what concerns conservative Muslims as they struggle over the meaning and influence of Islam in the 21st century. But if Luxenberg’s work is any indication, the questioning is just getting underway.

Chowk Special Challenging the Qur’an

http://www.msnbc.com/news/940974.asp

A German scholar contends that the Islamic text has been mistranscribed and promises raisins, not virgins

By Stefan Theil
NEWSWEEK INTERNATIONAL

July 28 issue — In a note of encouragement to his fellow hijackers, September 11 ringleader Muhammad Atta cheered their impending “marriage in Paradise” to the 72 wide-eyed virgins the Qur’an promises to the departed faithful. Palestinian newspapers have been known to describe the death of a suicide bomber as a “wedding to the black-eyed in eternal Paradise.” But if a German expert on Middle Eastern languages is correct, these hopes of sexual reward in the afterlife are based on a terrible misunderstanding.


ARGUING THAT TODAY’S version of the Qur’an has been mistranscribed from the original text, scholar Christoph Luxenberg says that what are described as “houris” with “swelling breasts” refer to nothing more than “white raisins” and “juicy fruits.”
Luxenberg—a pseudonym—is one of a small but growing group of scholars, most of them working in non-Muslim countries, studying the language and history of the Qur’an. When his new book is published this fall, it’s likely to be the most far-reaching scholarly commentary on the Qur’an’s early genesis, taking this infant discipline far into uncharted—and highly controversial—territory. That’s because Islamic orthodoxy considers the holy book to be the verbatim revelation of Allah, speaking to his prophet, Muhammad, through the Angel Gabriel, in Arabic. Therefore, critical study of God’s undiluted word has been off-limits in much of the Islamic world. (For the same reason, translations of the Qur’an are never considered authentic.) Islamic scholars who have dared ignore this taboo have often found themselves labeled heretics and targeted with death threats and violence. Luxenberg, a professor of Semitic languages at one of Germany’s leading universities, has chosen to remain anonymous because he fears a fatwa by enraged Islamic extremists.
Luxenberg’s chief hypothesis is that the original language of the Qur’an was not Arabic but something closer to Aramaic. He says the copy of the Qur’an used today is a mistranscription of the original text from Muhammad’s time, which according to Islamic tradition was destroyed by the third caliph, Osman, in the seventh century. But Arabic did not turn up as a written language until 150 years after Muhammad’s death, and most learned Arabs at that time spoke a version of Aramaic. Rereading the Paradise passage in Aramaic, the mysterious houris turn into raisins and fruit—much more common components of the Paradise myth.
The forthcoming book contains plenty of other bombshells. It claims that the Qur’an’s commandment for women to cover themselves is based on a similar misreading; in Sura 24, the verse that calls for women to “snap their scarves over their bags” becomes in Aramaic “snap their belts around their waists.” Even more explosive are readings that strengthen scholars’ views that the Qur’an had Christian origins. Sura 33 calls Muhammad the “seal of the prophets,” taken to mean the final and ultimate prophet of God. But an Aramaic reading, says Luxenberg, turns Muhammad into a “witness of the prophets”—i.e., someone who bears witness to the established Judeo-Christian texts. The Qur’an, in Arabic, talks about the “revelation” of Allah, but in Aramaic that term turns into “teaching” of the ancient Scriptures. The original Qur’an, Luxenberg contends, was in fact a Christian liturgical document—before an expanding Arab empire turned Muhammad’s teachings into the basis for its new religion long after the Prophet’s death.

Such interpretations will undoubtedly draw the ire of many Muslims—and not just extremists. After all, revisionist scholars have been persecuted for much less; in 2001, Egypt’s Constitutional Court confirmed the “apostasy” of former University of Cairo scholar Nasr Hamid Abu-Zayd, for considering the Qur’an a document written by humans.
Still, Luxenberg may be ushering in a whole new era of Qur’anic study. “Luxenberg’s findings are very relevant and convincing,” says Mondher Sfar, a Tunisian specialist on the historic origins of the Qur’an in exile in Paris. “They make possible a new interpretation of the Qur’an.” In the West, questioning the literal veracity of the Bible was a crucial step in breaking the church’s grip on power—and in developing a modern, secular society. That experience, as much as the questioning itself, is no doubt what concerns conservative Muslims as they struggle over the meaning and influence of Islam in the 21st century. But if Luxenberg’s work is any indication, the questioning is just getting underway.

President Pervez Musharaff’s Views Jihad Industry Gathers Steam in Pakistan
Mon Jul 21, 8:26 AM ET Add World - OneWorld.net to My Yahoo!

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=655&ncid=655&e=3&u=/oneworld/20030721/wl_oneworld/105021058792550

Mohammad Shehzad,OneWorld South Asia

ISLAMABAD, July 21 (OneWorld) - Fuelled by the US-led invasion of Iraq (news - web sites), and the promise of paradise after martyrdom, thousands of impoverished young Pakistanis are allegedly enrolling for jihad (holy war) despite the ongoing war against terror.



``Jihad is spreading like wildfire in Pakistan,`` claims an official in the country`s Interior Ministry. He says that according to a slew of separatist publications, between January and June 2003, Islamic groups recruited over 7,000 young boys aged between 18 and 25.


``Some of the largest separatist outfits - Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) - claim to have recruited more than 3,350 and 2,235 boys respectively during this period,`` says the official.


Jihadi groups are finding the Pakistani environment particularly receptive after the US-led attacks on Afghanistan (news - web sites) and Iraq. They use publications, web sites, local prayer leaders, cassettes, CDs, and souvenirs like file covers, badges, T-shirts and so on to lure recruits.


Millions of pamphlets featuring ballads, speeches, interviews and profiles of young jihadis are distributed free by these organizations.


For his part, Pakistan Interior Minister, Syed Faisal Saleh Hayat, maintains, ``The government is monitoring the activities of these jihadi groups and will take stern action if it got any proof or substantial evidence. But we cannot proceed against them without any evidence. The government also can`t ban them unless they are really involved in anti-state activities.``


Adds a senior Interior Ministry official, ``We simply cannot penalize people for donating their children for jihad or stop boys from joining the jihadi outfits, as all this takes place secretly. There is no official patronage.``


Officials say young men are eager to become Islam`s foot soldiers and fight for separatist groups in the world`s hottest trouble spots such as Kashmir (news - web sites) and Afghanistan.


``The young jihadis come from poor and middle-class families. When they fail to find jobs, they join jihadi outfits that provide them food and shelter and promise them paradise, which is attainable only to those who die for Allah, fighting non-believers. Thus our frustrated boys are misled and trapped,`` says columnist Gulzar Ahmad.


Significantly, as the member of a prominent separatist group remarks, ``The vast majority of boys who join the radical Islamists consist of runaways.`` He says sixty percent of them are high school dropouts.


``People`s passions are stirred when the jihadis are presented as heroes of Islam,`` says psychologist Dr Minhas.


With the Americans in the neighborhood, Islamists are having a field day. ``The US bombing of Afghanistan and Iraq is an attack on the Muslim fraternity. You will go to hell if you do not wage jihad against the US,`` thundered LeT chief Hafiz Mohammad Saeed in a recent public speech.


``Send your boys to us. We will train them and send them to Kashmir for jihad,`` invokes a message by Saeed in a CD.


In his Friday sermon at the Al-Raza mosque in the north Pakistan town of Rawalpindi, prayer leader Maulana Yousaf exhorts the assembly to ``Contact me if you want to donate your sons for Kashmir jihad.`` He boasts, ``My speeches have motivated hundreds of people to donate their sons. I have raised an army of 300 holy warriors within four months.``


Such impassioned speeches have the desired effect. Take the case of laborer Ahsan Mehmood, a father of eight, who gave two of his sons to jihad last month. ``It is better for them to die for a cause and embrace martyrdom before I kill them due to hunger,`` is how he justifies his decision.


Prayer leaders and schoolteachers are jihad`s local PR agents. Says Karim Khan, a vegetable seller from Gujranwala in the northern Punjab province, ``My 18-year-old son joined the LeT because he was influenced by his teacher`s lectures. He would tell the boys that the real world (news - Y! TV) was in paradise, which a Muslim could achieve only through martyrdom, to be secured by fighting in Kashmir.


Khan`s son played his part to the hilt. Last month, he was one of eight youngsters shot dead in Indian administered Kashmir.





That`s the kind of fate awaiting many Pakistani separatists - whether they are fighting the Americans in Afghanistan or the Indians in Kashmir. The LeT web site, for instance, says around 800 youngsters were killed fighting the Indian Army last year.

The head of the Society for Protection of Children`s Rights, Anis Jillani, says seminaries are the real constituencies of the fundamentalists. ``A large number of boys who join jihadi outfits come from the most impoverished backgrounds. They join seminaries at a tender age and are taught in the orthodox style,`` he says.

Of course, not all parents see the world in the stark, apocalyptic terms of the jihadi. Complains Maula Bux, whose son, Kalim, was killed in Kashmir in March, ``The jihadi outfits chase young boys and brainwash them.``

The recruiters tell innocent boys they will go straight to paradise if they join jihad in Kashmir. ``Young boys are swayed by this deceptive talk and desert their parents. That`s what they did to my son,`` laments Bux.

``The militants compare martyrs with Osama bin Laden (news - web sites). This tempted my son Imran, 23, to become a jihadi. He had failed to find a job, so to become famous he became a jihadi. He died in June, fighting the Indian Army in Kashmir,`` cries Sakina, 40 from Muridke in the northern Punjab province.

Though the Pakistan government has banned jihadi outfits like the LeT, JeM, Al-Badr, Harkat-ul Mujahideen and so on, they have re-surfaced under new names.

Saeed says his LeT is banned in other parts of Pakistan except Pakistan-administered Kashmir where it has a free run. Similarly, JeM chief Maulana Azhar Masood has publicly declared that Jaish is under no restrictions as long as it operates within Pakistan-administered Kashmir.

Although the government denies such recruitment, jihadi outfits have reportedly set up offices in residential areas of Pakistan cities, from where they approach the public.

``Recruitment takes place under the government`s patronage. It is the same old wine in a new bottle. The same jihadi leaders are heading the same banned jihadi outfits under new names. The government is trying to fool the public and the Americans by pretending to have distanced itself from the jihadis,`` alleges senior journalist M. Ziauddin.

Hey Ram, What Have You Done to My Religion? http://www.dawn.com/weekly/images/images3.htm

Fame and fortune in India , yet loyalty to Pakistan.....................


Down a much travelled road


By Aamna Haider Isani

``Life has been a long journey for me. I`ve come a long way from where I started. I look back and see mist, shadows. Those bright young faces are merely illusions now. Sometimes I wonder, did they actually exist or did I just dream them...`` says Meher Rizvi.

Remembered as the talented and beautiful young face of the `70s, Meher Rizvi recently visited Karachi after an absence of almost three decades. Known then for her hard work in TV serials like Bajia`s Shama and Mohsin Ali`s Parchayian, plus her dedication to the development of classical dance, she earned a name for herself. Today Meher Rizvi lives in Mumbai, the city of her ancestors, but a second choice as far as she`s concerned. She would have never left Karachi if things had not become so unpleasant for her here. She talks about the migratory path of her life, the ups and downs, and the circumstances that led her to where she is today.

Born in Hyderabad Deccan to Muslim educationist parents, Meher and her family migrated to Pakistan in 1964. After getting married and shifting to Dhaka with her husband she returned to Karachi in 1971 with her four children, traumatized by having experienced the bloodshed and massacres of the 1971 war.

With her husband detained in Bangladesh, things were not easy for her on a personal level but professionally, PTV welcomed her and she made her debut as an actress and classical dancer. Even as a beginner she was lucky enough to work with names like Fatima Surraiya Bajia, Omer Aftab, Ishrat Ansari and Zia Mohyeddin. She also joined Radio Pakistan`s Southeast Asia service.

``The quality of plays then was so much better,`` she reminisces. ``Storylines were beautiful and the whole nation followed the serials. They were taken really seriously and evening parties and weddings were planned so they wouldn`t clash with the prime time dramas.`` That was PTV`s golden age when writers like Haseena Moin, Intezar Hussain and Hameed Kashmiri were at their prime. So what, then, does she feel has caused this plunge in quality?

``Basically, stories have no life now. They`re written a dime a dozen. Secondly, our industry is blindly aping Hindustan, which is a pity as our television has always been stronger and better.``

Inherently sincere to Pakistan, Meher had hoped to settle down to a comfortable life in Karachi but things didn`t turn out as she had planned.

``My husband was detained in East Pakistan and I, as a woman, was an easy target. Men around me were wolves in sheep`s clothing and 90 per cent of them were exploitative opportunists. They didn`t let me live in peace. The media played the worst role of all. There were accusations, scandals - it was terrible. I didnn`t know how to react, to fight back and protect myself. I`ll never forgive those people who soured Karachi for me.``

Meher`s life has been ruled by the pull of showbiz. As a child, she was quick to realize the disinterest she had for studies.

``I wasn`t an enthusiastic student. But I loved dance and started learning Bharatnatyam at the age of six. I got a diploma, then a degree. I even topped in Intercollegiate.`` Her passions didn`t stop at dance though.

From drama to radio to television, acting to writing scripts for feature films, Meher experienced it all. And like a well-planned feature film, her journey was marked by all odds: war, scandal and even murder. But even these tragic events did not dissuade her from doing what she loved most.

``From television dramas I turned to dance and choreographed a programme by the name of `Hum Rukhs.` One of my ragas, `Tanhai` was also nominated for a festival.``

Though Meher was a very hard working and sincere artist, she feels she suffered due to the lack of public relationing.

``At the end I joined the National Development Corporation and worked side by side with Faiz Ahmad Faiz. It was good, but soon I realized there was no future for me in Pakistan.``

Disillusioned and disappointed, Meher left Karachi in 1977, working her way through Dubai to settle down in the US. After 16 years in America she suffered the greatest loss imaginable when her son Kamran, attracted by the glitz and glamour of India, moved to Mumbai and was murdered.

``I lost him,`` she said, still visibly shattered over the incident. ``He joined the film industry at the age of 26 and was stabbed in jealousy. Kamran used to tell me to come to Hindustan but I never did. I didn`t feel comfortable returning to a country we had left for another, but when he died I decided to shift.``

Having close ties in India, settling down was not a problem for Meher. She reconnected with her relatives (Shabana Azmi being her first cousin) and before long was back in business. In `92 she was approached to work on a serial Seher and her work took off from there. Soon her career achieved heights that she had never imagined.

Having detoured from acting to writing, she recently sold her first script, Srinagar se sarhadon tak to iDream Productions (of Monsoon Wedding and Bend it Like Beckham fame). Though she`s unable to disclose the storyline, she hints that it begins with the Kashmiri Pandits in India and travels through time and borders to the club culture of America. It`s a bold film aimed at healing the scarred relations between the Muslims and Hindus of the subcontinent.

Meher is also working on a second script, for Tata Films, which will be based on Indian and Pakistani immigrants in the US. To top it off, Doordarshan and Sony have also shown interest in running her plays.

Today Meher Rizvi has returned to Karachi with a message of peace. On one level it`s a symbolic attempt to resolve Indo-Pak differences through art and culture. On a more personal note, one realizes that she is also here to clear her closet of skeletons and make peace with a city that she claims didn`t treat her too well back in the `70s.

Meher is also looking for a Pakistani team to work with on her film. Though she will be casting the talented Tabu, who also happens to be her niece, she is looking for a young Pakistani girl who will fit the role.

PTV has welcomed Meher warmly, she claims, and she has been made offers for her plays. But she is apprehensive about selling her scripts if she can`t personally supervise their production.

``I can`t compromise, that`s my problem. For example, Indian producers loved my scripts and were willing to take them if only I could convert the main characters from Muslims to Hindus. How could I do that without selling my principles? So I refused and here I am.`` She has also been asked to write a soap opera for television, but she has declined the offer, thinking that the Pakistani viewer would never be interested in following an endless storyline.

Loyalty to Pakistan has brought Meher back, though she lacks neither fame nor fortune in India. It`s a path not many artists would risk taking. Time has scarred her instead of healing and she sits here, not the charmer of yesterday, but a woman wizened by the tragedies of life. Her only saviour - her work. One hopes Karachi can return the sincerity and help her come to peace with the city she loves.

Terrorism, Sectarianism and the Military Will History Repeat Itself in Pakistan?


“It was recognized from the first that a campaign of genocide would be necessary to eradicate the threat: ``Kill three million of them,`` said President (general) Yahya Khan at the February conference, ``and the rest will eat out of our hands``. On March 25 (1971) the genocide was launched. The university in Dacca was attacked and students exterminated in their hundreds. Death squads roamed the streets of Dacca, killing some 7,000 people in a single night. It was only the beginning. ``Within a week, half the population of Dacca had fled, and at least 30,000 people had been killed. Chittagong, too, had lost half its population. All over East Pakistan people were taking flight, and it was estimated that in April some thirty million people were wandering helplessly across East Pakistan to escape the grasp of the military.`` – Robert Payne, Massacre [1972]

Paraphrasing Christopher Hitchens, every decade or so, the US writes a blank check to some obscure dictator in Pakistan, and the Pakistani army happily uses this free ride to perpetrate genocide in its neighborhood.


In the 70’s, we turned a blind eye while Gen. Yahya killed millions in Bangladesh, with a kill rate that would put Hitler to shame. Even after the US congress cried foul and the US ambassador to Bangladesh declared “genocide in Bangladesh”, Nixon and Kissinger praised Yahya and sent him arms to aid in the killing. In the nineties, after the Russians had left Afghanistan, the Pakistani army happily armed, fed, financed and trained a band of jihadi hoodlums, now known to us as the Taliban; of course, the Taliban directly caused the death of hundreds of thousands of Afghan civilians in the nineties. While the cleansing continued unabated, oil executives busily negotiated oil-pipelines with the Taliban, with nary a consequence for the Pakistanis.


After 911, writing blank checks to the Pakistanis seems to have come back in vogue. The only question that remains unanswered is – where will the genocide be, this time?


Terrorizing the Neighbors

The answer may be slowly becoming clear. Selig Harrison discussing Pakistani terrorist training camps, in the Boston Globe says “India has recently provided the United States with detailed maps showing 174 locations where Pakistani base camps of varying sizes are now operating. State Department and Defense Intelligence Agency sources say that US reconnaissance satellite findings broadly corroborate the Indian maps”. Not only has Nancy Powell, the US ambassador to Pakistan, called Pakistan a platform for terror, but Mike Evanoff, the US embassy`s (in Islamabad) chief of diplomatic security, the State Department`s version of the Secret Service, had the following to say about Pakistan to Christian Science Monitor: ``This is the epicenter for terrorism. It really is. This is the only country I know in the world that has so many groups that are against the US or Western ideals.``.

Bernard-Henri Levy’s goes even further in his recently published book - “Pakistan is the most delinquent of nations”, he confirms. With the caveat that Pakistan is the real key to all Islamic-led international terrorism, he says “the US had solved only 1% of the problem by deposing Saddam Hussein”. And rightfully so, if you see the impact on Pakistan’s neighbors.

In India, Pakistani terrorists or freedom fighters as Musharraf likes to call them, regularly create headlines like:

· “Suspected Islamic militants axed to death six members of a shepherd`s family overnight …The attackers killed four women and two children, the officer said.”

· “Militants slit the throats of two women, shot dead another person and set off two explosions damaging a bridge …”

· “Terrorists lob grenade into Christian school, kill one teacher…”

· “Terrorists have slit the throats of two of the four policemen abducted after the attack on a police post in Udhampur on Sunday.”

· “Unidentified gunmen barged into a house in a remote village of Mandi. The irked gunmen in an attempt to punish the lady Sharifa Bi wife of Muhammad Husain put her on fire and then extinguished the flames to let her die in pain.”

· “Women Killed over dress-code. The attackers slit the throats of two of the women, both aged 21, and shot the third,…”

Rest assured, this is equal opportunity terrorism. President Karzai seems to be unhappy, as the NYTimes reports “Karzai has blamed the recent wave of violence across the south of the country and in Kabul on Pakistan-based terrorists”. Col Tom Brewer, of the US special Forces, talking about illegal arms seized in Afghanistan says “The arms they’ve recovered are made in China and most of the people are coming back in from neighboring countries, particularly Pakistan”. This negative view of Pakistani interference in Afghanistan, seems to be shared by the Europeans, too:

“European legislators visiting Afghanistan this week were outspoken at a news conference today in their criticism of Pakistan`s support for Taliban elements, which they said were crossing from Pakistan to launch attacks in southern Afghanistan, disappearing later back across the border”. -NYTimes

Cross-border terrorism it seems is continuing on both of Pakistani borders. Surely, Pakistan must be helping us out a lot, for us to tolerate all this?

Pakistan’s Help With Proliferation

Come to think of it, we have very generously given away billions in grants and loan forgiveness with the expectation of Pakistan’s help in the war on terrorism. Pakistan in turn, used the C-130s loaned by us to fight terror, to continue a generous barter trade of nuclear weapons technology with North Korea. A Japanese newspaper quoting US security officials, claimed that this trade continued as late as March of 2003, months after the friendly Pakistani dictator, Musharraf, had given Powell a 400% guarantee that such hanky-panky with North Korea was a thing of the past.

North Korea, however is not the only member of the axis of evil that has benefited from Pakistan’s generosity; talking about the Iran’s Natanz atomic power plant, Jane’s goes even further “the Natanz inspections also showed that the gas centrifuges, believed to be based on a decades-old European design that US officials said was obtained from Pakistan in the early 1990s…”. Nucleonics week reported essentially the same facts in January of this year – the evidence of Pakistani support to Iran’s weapons program seems to be mounting.

Another sign of the expansion of this deadly trade is reported by Geo-strategy Direct; it seems that the Saudi royals want to keep up with the nuclear-minded Iranian mullahs. So, who comes to the rescue – you guessed it, the dependable Pakistanis. Turns out that, not only have the Pakistanis been handing over nuclear technology to the Saudi princes, but they also facilitated the sale of Chinese CSS-2 missiles to the kingdom. The report further states

“Saudi Arabia has been secretly obtaining help from Pakistan for its missile and nuclear program, the analysts report. Riyadh helped finance Pakistan`s nuclear program precisely to ensure that the royal family will have a bomb in case of an emergency… Saudi Arabia has neither the time nor the expertise for a nuclear program. The Saudis saw how Israel knocked out the Iraqi reactor at Osirak in 1981 and set back Baghdad`s program by a decade. Instead, the Saudis are expected to merely buy complete warheads and obtain Pakistani experts to maintain and operate the systems”. Maybe, this explains why several Pakistani nuclear scientists have disappeared without a trace in recent months, according to the South Asia Tribune.

As if handing out nuclear weapons technology to dangerous threesome of North Korea, Iran and Saudi Arabia was not enough, Eliza Manningham-Buller, the director general of the MI5, recently warned that “it was only a matter of time before Al-Qaeda terrorists carried out nuclear, chemical or biological attack on a western city”. She further added ``renegade scientists`` - understood to be from Pakistan - had given Islamic extremists information to create weapons of mass destruction, such as ``dirty bombs``, and that they would become ever more sophisticated.


US reaction to this wanton proliferation has been surprisingly muted – limited sanctions on a particular lab (KRL), which in any case, gets no help from the US, whatsoever. Sure, the occasional Al-Qaeda big-wig or two get miraculously located somewhere in Pakistan every 6 months, and more are caught every time Musharraf visits our coasts, but is this reason enough for us to ignore proliferation to North Korea, KSA, Iran and AlQaeda? Who thought up this quid-pro-quo?


Curt put-downs from Foggy-bottom to any such protests, usually go something like this “If Musharraf fails, hardliners could take over, or fundamentalists, or chaos. We can`t let Musharraf fail”.


Where is Musharraf Taking Pakistan?


Using his vast powers, Musharraf held a Saddam like referendum on his rule last year, in which he was the only candidate and received a whopping 98% approval. This aversion to democracy has forced several noted Pakistani journalists to flee to the US, thanks to threats to their lives by the army. Determined to keep democratic forces at bay, Musharraf jerry-rigged elections where the main secular parties were hamstrung. Needless to say, the jihadi parties under the banner of MMA gained control in 2 out of 4 provinces in Pakistan. The elected prime minister now is reduced to calling the dictator his boss and the dictator has not dared to formally open proceedings at the National Assembly for the last 7 months, in fear of protests against his rule.

Not happy, with throttling the press, paralyzing the National assembly and helping the Taliban-like MMA come to power, Musharraf seems to have turned on ordinary Pakistanis now.

Talking about recent army violence in the town of Okara, prominent educationist Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy says, “As I stood by the blood-spattered earth next to a wall pock-marked with bullets, grim-faced villagers indicated to me the field from where they said the Rangers had ceaselessly machine-gunned the village for over an hour. For all practical purposes, the nearly one million people of Okara are under military occupation but Pakistan`s political parties, which vociferously scream at being denied their share of the pie, are yet to take note of this. Why are they doing this, I asked one villager from the crowd that was now swarming around me. ``They (the Pakistani military) want to put us on contract, pay rent to them, take away our rights to the land, and then throw us out``, he replied, but this land is ours because our forefathers have tilled it and we have nowhere else to go”.

So, in order to allow our favorite dictator to hold on to his throne, we’re tolerating brutalization and murder of ordinary Pakistanis and even journalists. Problem is we’ve seen this pattern before – remember how we propped up the Shah of Iran.

Radical Islamization of Pakistan

The rigged elections from last year are beginning to achieve exactly what we’ve been trying to avoid – a radical Islamist nuclear-powered Pakistan. The MMA recently passed Taliban like draconian laws in the province of NWFP. Time magazine detailing newly promulgated laws:

“From now on, Arabic, the language of the Koran, will be obligatory in schools; girls 12 years and older will have to wear the head-to-toe veil known as the burqa, and women will not be allowed to leave home unaccompanied by a husband or male relative”.

Further, there’s now a department called Hisab (accounting) in NWFP which does pretty much what the dreaded Department of promotion of virtue and prevention of vice did for the Taliban. Fresh of the press – Balochistan province just announced, it’s next in line to promulgate the sharia based legal system. Two (provinces) down, two more to go.


This radical Islamisation is not limited anymore to Pakistani politics. In Lahore’s respected Punjab University “last month, professors of English literature were flabbergasted when they learned that a top administrator had ordered their curriculum reviewed for un-Islamic texts. Among the books deemed offensive to public morals: Gulliver`s Travels and Tess of the d`Urbervilles… the university`s academic council (even) engaged in heated debate over whether to drop English as a requirement, as fundamentalist groups have urged``. Islamist vigilantes in Lahore, Peshawar and Multan have begun painting bill-boards showing women’s faces black, and “food streets”, much like food courts in our malls, are being shut down to prevent “mixing of the sexes and prostitution”.


According to the Washington Post, professors who have been ordered not to discuss the book bans, confide that all this is a microcosm of the political environment in the country. Famous Pakistani author Ahmed Rashid feels that this cultural change, spreading throughout the country, has primarily been fostered by the military government.


The ominous part of all this is that theocratic governments and societies are rarely, if ever removed or changed, without massive violence and use of power.

Pakistani Army vs. Pakistan

Strong arm tactics and outright commandeering have left the army in Pakistan in control of all financial establishments of any value, including travel agencies, utilities, cement production, fertilizer factories, dairy production, employment agencies, rice mills, sea-ports, postal service, telecommunication infrastructure, oil/gas plants, pharmaceuticals, mines, wool mills and cereal production, to name a few. And no, this is not limited to just legal economic activities, but also extends to illegal ones – Kamila Hayat reports that a number of illegal gambling dens are coming up all over the country, run and owned by army personnel. You get the idea – everything and everything, legal and sometimes even illegal ones, in Pakistan, seem to belong to the Pakistani army.

Quips Khayyam Durrani, who runs an elite school only meant for army children ``The army considers itself a privileged class. The fact is that the actual rulers in Pakistani society are the army people..”.

These privileges and whims of the ruling army are slowly creating a divide that will never be bridged with American money or Musharraf’s guns. A perfect example of this widening divide was the open threat to ban Musharraf’s entry into NWFP, issued recently by Syed Munawar Hassan, a top leader of the MMA religious alliance. The vitriol in the Balochistan post article against the army is even more palpable, when it says:

“With guns given to them by the nation to counter the enemy, the generals instead, have held the Mother country, its people, its parliament and the judiciary to ransom. …The Army has become above the law, above the constitution and even above the country. It feeds on the country`s prosperity and the well being its people who now, are trudging an existence simply to serve the army and its selected elites.”.

The army is not only immune from the law, but also dispenses its own brand of justice. A report in the Gulf Times, reports:

“The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan recently investigated a case in Multan where army officials had placed a banner outside a textile shop, asking all military men to boycott it. This mysterious message outside a commercial business had been motivated by the fact that the shop owner, Aslam Shahzad, had testified in a case involving an army officer and a policeman in a scuffle”. Other similar incidents, where police officers have lost their jobs for going up against the army, are also related in the report. In fact, as Kamila states, patriotism today is increasingly tied to what is good for the Pakistani army, not what is good for Pakistan:

“Indeed, the perception that civilians are today second class citizens in the state is growing. And with the army top brass apparently seeing any attempts to highlight wrongs committed by men in khaki as unpatriotic behavior…”.

Abid Ullah Jan, yet another journalist who had to flee Pakistan due to his opinions on the army, concludes his pensive article on “Pak army vs. Pakistan” with “In the final analysis we would come to know that Pakistan was not at war with India or someone else, but its own armed forces”.

This is not a country moving towards democracy, but towards anarchy – unfortunately, with American help. Problem is, we’ve seen this pattern before - the current situation is exactly the same as in late 1970 and early 1971 – provinces elected a government that the army did not like and the rift between the army and the citizens of East Pakistan exploded. Result – 3 million civilians killed, 300000 women r aped in 9 short months.

M.A. Niazi in his editorial in the Nation seems to predict the oncoming obvious “There is therefore one solution which solves for the foreseeable future Musharraf`s problems, and serves US interests. And that is for him to let loose a reign of terror on Pakistan, to establish a true dictatorship”. Eerily similar to Gen. Yahya Khan’s decision in 1971 to perpetrate genocide, in order to solve his problems.

Where Next?

It may suit our immediate interests to coddle this dictator, but let us not forget that we were doing the same to another dictator in Iraq till a few years ago. The difference is that this dictator actually does have nuclear weapons, has donated nuclear weapons technology to rogue states and does have nuclear scientists with strong linkages to the Osama. Terrorism against friendly governments like Afghanistan and India continue everyday under the very noses of the army that controls all activity in Pakistan. We did not learn from our mistakes with the Shah and naively repeated them with Saddam; now, we see a repetition of this unfortunate habit with Musharraf. Sadly, Shenoy gets it about right:

“The general has trampled on every principle Americans supposedly cherish — separation of church and state, democracy and free elections, an independent judiciary and the rule of law. Yet, as long as the Pakistani army does not openly embrace bin Laden, the United States shall support the dictator of Pakistan.”

Free Trade agreements and weapons of war like F-16s given unfettered to a brutal dictatorship with a penchant for terrorism may not be the best thing for the safety of US or its friends. In our hurry to bestow gifts on the genocidal dictator, let us not leave our national interests and abiding principles behind. Both our strategic interests and our principles, call for the support of the Pakistani people, and not the Pakistani dictator.

Contrary to popular perceptions, Musharraf is not the only solution to key US interests in Pakistan - remedial steps to bring Pakistan back into the comity of respected nations is the only way forward. In stead of papering over problems specific to Pakistan through our injudicious support for Musharraf, we must deal with them directly, as in:

· Strengthen legitimate democratic leadership: Benazir Bhutto must be brought back with appropriate forgiveness of charges and a critical role to play in the administration of Pakistan, even if this means a re-election.

· Strengthen democratic institutions: Drop arbitrary modifications to the Pakistani constitution as well as revoke the supremacy of non-elected bodies such as the National Security council – the elected National assembly and the existing constitution must become supreme again, with some temporary support for maintaining Musharraf’s position through the transition.

· Send army back to the barracks: Armies that own countries tend to cause immense destruction. The army’s stranglehold over the economy and civilian organizations must be loosened – political corruption is a fact of life with almost all other countries in Asia and should not be used as an excuse to let the army loot the nation.

· Reform Pakistani education: Without significant changes to curricula in schools, the radicalization of Pakistani society cannot be reversed. Aid dollars must be tied to metrics reflecting a change in the direction of education. This is the only solution to stopping the endless supply of terrorists.

· Reform in Charitable and financial institutions: Charity money is used to fuel terrorism in Pakistan – without this money and strengthened financial institutions, terrorism will starve. Without terrorism, problems with neighbor India can be resolved peacefully.

Strengthening democracy and reforming education will automatically start improving Pakistan’s economy and its relationship with other democracies like India; thus, reducing the need for WMD proliferation dollars. Pakistan’s problems with nuclear neighbor India and the rest of the world will not disappear until we cure Pakistan’s internal ills. At the cost of repeating myself, almost any cure of Pakistan has to start with limiting the role of the Pakistani army and bringing in democracy, and sadly enough things have become so convoluted in Pakistan, only America can help fix things at this point. In effect, much like the US is undertaking nation-building in Iraq, it has to do the same in Pakistan – Pakistan, probably needs this more than any other country in the world.

If we’re not careful and do not take remedial action in Pakistan soon, there will be another genocide; who knows where it’ll be, but 1971 is here again - maybe in India this time, may be Afghanistan, or quite possibly in Pakistan, itself like ‘71. Or heaven forbid, as Physicist Gordon Prather, predicting a nuclear attack on the US suggests:

“ Who did it? Probably al-Qaida. But where did they get the nuke? Well, nukes leave ``fingerprints.`` Our radio-chemists are going to know right away if the nuke came from Pakistan, the most likely source.”

Trapped In A Communal Riot http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/movies/story/78157p-72062c.html

MR. AND MRS. IYER




Running time: 120 mins. Unrated: Violence. In Bengali, with English subtitles. At the Loews State.


For anyone put off by the anything-goes state of contemporary pop culture, this chaste Indian love story might be the perfect antidote. An orthodox Hindu woman traveling alone, Meena Iyer (Konkona Sensharma) would not, under normal circumstances, even speak to a single, Muslim male like Raja Choudhary (Rahul Bose). But when Hindu extremists hijack their bus, Meena impulsively saves Raja`s life by pretending to be his wife. During the long, dangerous trip, they begin to believe their own charade. This is not a film for the impatient. But director Aparna Sen finds the poetry in romantic restraint, which is a mighty rare resource these days.

Trapped In A Communal Riot MR. AND MRS. IYER, 2002, 120min, 35mm
Friday, April 11, 7:00pm
Saturday, April 12, 8:00pm

Mr. and Mrs. Iyer explores the common bond between a man and a woman separated by centuries of religious conflicts and taboos. On a bus journey, Meenakshi, a young Tamil Brahmin, accepts water from Raja, a Muslim. Introduced to Meenakshi by a mutual friend, Raja feels responsible for the young woman`s comfort and safety. Naturally enough, everyone on the bus takes them for a couple. But then the bus is stopped by a group of Hindu extremists, looking for the Muslims who had burned down one of their villages. Raja is frightened, while Meenakshi, born and raised in a Brahmin family, is shocked at his religious affiliation and feels obliged to keep her distance. But an extremely violent massacre takes place: guns are fired, blood flows and people are killed. When she sees how savagely the Muslims have been murdered, Meenakshi decides to save Raja`s life and lies to the extremists, assuring them they are married: Mr. and Mrs Iyer. Forced to leave the bus, they are left to their own devices. The violence and horror they have witnessed has brought them closer together, allowing them to put aside their religious differences, and they soon discover a mutual attraction. Mr. and Mrs. Iyer, Aparna Sen`s second English-language film, was written in the months following September 11, and six months before the riots in Gujarat, uncannily prescient in terms of current political events.

Trapped In A Communal Riot http://www.nypost.com/movies/56943.htm

MR. AND MRS. IYER
2 Stars

ALTHOUGH writer-director Aparna Sen`s slow-moving but atmospheric film is set against the backdrop of communal rioting in India, it is first and foremost a love story.

A prologue of news clippings details the real-life violence that broke out in the western state of Gujarat in mid-2002, setting the scene for a tale of two strangers who manage to overcome their different religious backgrounds to forge a connection.

Meenakshi Iyer (played by Sen`s daughter Konkona Sensharma), traveling with her 9-month-old son, Santanam, is introduced to wildlife photographer Raja Chowdhary (Rahul Bose) before boarding a bus to Calcutta.

When the bus is stopped by a mob of Hindu extremists looking to seek revenge on Muslims for the torching of a Hindu village, Meenakshi is shocked at first to find her traveling companion is a Muslim.

But, rather than see him killed, she covers for him with a lie: She tells the fundamentalists they are Mr. and Mrs. Iyer, a married Hindu couple.

With strict curfews imposed, the pair are forced to make their own way home amid the surrounding violence and hostility - and a wary tolerance soon spills over to romance.

Sen provides some scenic shots of the Indian countryside along the way, but the central narrative is ultimately too one-dimensional to sustain interest.

In Bengali, English and Tamil with English subtitles. Running time: 120 minutes. Not rated (language). At Loews State, 1540 Broadway at 46th Street.- Megan Lehmann

Trapped In A Communal Riot Hatred Cannot Keep These Lovers Apart
By LAWRENCE VAN GELDER

New York Times

A plea for an end to sectarian violence comes wrapped in adventure and romance in the Indian film ``Mr. and Mrs. Iyer.``

Written and directed by Aparna Sen, it focuses on communal bloodshed between India`s Hindus and Muslims to appeal as well for an end to conflict between Palestinian and Israeli and between Protestant and Roman Catholic in Northern Ireland.

Advertisement

The well-acted romance, as the two principal characters are thrown together by unanticipated events, is hard to resist, even though the answer to the crucial question it raises is all too conveniently deferred time and again.

In its preachments, ``Mr. and Mrs. Iyer,`` which opens today in New York and the San Francisco area, is not a subtle film; and, most curiously — to put it mildly — for a sermon on tolerance, it resorts to history`s eternal scapegoat, a Jew, when it seeks a character willing to betray another to save his own skin.

That brief episode comes at a pivotal point in the bus journey that begins the film. The varied passengers — boisterous teenagers, an old Muslim couple, a grouchy woman, a retarded boy and his mother, some card-playing men — include a worldly, handsome photojournalist who specializes in wildlife and a lovely mother traveling with her year-old boy. Both are bound, eventually by rail, for Calcutta.

Introduced by mutual friends just before the start of the trip along hairpin turns from remote and beautiful hill country, they are Raja Chowdhary (Rahul Bose), the photographer, and Meenakshi Iyer (Konkona Sensharma), with her child, Santanam. Raja has agreed to look after Meena. Thanks to the restive baby, they eventually sit together, and the journey proceeds in relative calm.

Suddenly the bus encounters a roadblock, and when the rumors stop flying, it becomes clear that Hindu mobs are rampaging against Muslims after the burning of a Hindu village. Just before bloodthirsty extremists board the bus and haul off the old man to die, Raja tells the high-born Brahmin Meena that he is a Muslim. ``Don`t touch me`` is her shocked reply.

But as he rises to confront the invaders, Meena pulls him back down in his seat and passes them off to the killers as the Hindu couple Mr. and Mrs. Iyer.

As Meena gradually overcomes her prejudice, she and Raja fall in love while the perilous adventure puts them among police, among mobs and in an isolated and dilapidated resort. The unanswered question grows louder: Is there a real Mr. Iyer?

Directed by Aparna Sen
In English, with subtitled Tamil and Bengali
Not rated, 120 minutes

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/25/movies/25IYER.html?ex=1054267200&en=86fa2dfc31693b69&ei=5070

Pakistan and India - Lets Compromise Truth, realism and Kashmir
By M.P. Bhandara

At Intervals the rustling pine forests of Kashmir catch our fancy. We get euphoric at the thought of high-level talks with India. Fondly, we listen to our parents` or grandparents` recollections of Kashmir on holiday visits before partition; of houseboats drifting dreamily on Dal Lake; of fabulous forests and lakes in a picturesque fairyland; fair-complexioned Kashmiris selling their winter wares of rugs and shawls, and exquisite crafts in papier mache and oak.

The Kashmir valley today is one of the saddest places on God`s earth. The Kashmiris reputed for their gentleness and mild manners are at the receiving end of unspeakable brutalities. In that beautiful land is being waged a war of unending passions. In truth, having suffered unbearable punishment, the people of the valley yearn simply to be left alone. To be independent. To be the Switzerland of the subcontinent. A tourist haven with its independence guaranteed by the powers of the subcontinent.

I believe such a solution - the cynosure of the valley Kashmiris, irrespective of religious denomination - would today have overwhelming acceptance in Pakistan. If we can reduce the temperature of our relationship with India by reaching out to them in a spirit of sincerity, such a solution might also be acceptable to India. The Kashmir valley is a garland of thorns around the neck of India.

From an Indian point of view, a Kashmir solution acceptable to the valley Kashmiris is highly desirable. Overnight, India would be in the double-digit growth club with China. The creative energies that it would release in the subcontinent would be many times greater than the destructive energies of all the nuclear weapons held today by both countries.

No matter how fantastic such futurism may sound, it is no more far-fetched than the very idea of Pakistan was in 1940. An independent valley is a likely outcome in a post-nuclear war scenario, but that would be the worst of all options. The best: to make it peacefully happen in our lifetime.

If such optimism is an accepted goal, a heavy burden falls on Pakistan. Why? The moment of truth has arrived for us. Many of us have believed right from 1947 that force alone would gain us Kashmir. A tribal lashkar entered Kashmir in 1947, imposed itself on a vacillating Maharaja who was playing for independence.

Seen in retrospect, our first Kashmir mistake was to frighten the Maharaja with the Lashkar - which got within four miles of his palace and switched off his electricity. This gave the Maharaja no choice but to join India. The Lashkar turned out to be a loose cannon, indulging in loot and rapine. The Lashkar called itself Jihadists. It was a different matter in Gilgit, a non-Kashmiri colony of the Maharaja where the Balti militia staged a revolt under the leadership of its British commander and joined Pakistan.

The second attempt at force in Kashmir occurred in 1965. Then, as today, we were victims of our own make-believe. Our rulers bought the illusion that sending armed saboteurs would ignite a freedom struggle in Kashmir. The plan was called ``Operation Gibraltar``. What happened was a surprise. In many cases, the ``enslaved`` denounced the saboteurs to the police.

The 1965 generation of had not forgotten the rape and pillage of the Lashkar of 1947-48. ``Operation Gibraltar`` led to the war of 1965, which then in domino effect led to the civil war of 1971 between East and West Pakistan and the break-up of United Pakistan. If we forget this nexus of events leading to tragedy, we might repeat them.

The third attempt at using force was by guile. A Jihad supported by some Pakistan-based groups, amidst widespread Kashmiri anger commenced after repeated rigging of state elections by India. This phase, which commenced in the late eighties, continued till early 2002, and, in all probability, continues till today albeit in defiance of state policy by our Jihadist parties. According to a knowledgeable informant, the level of infiltration is between 25 and 33 per cent prior to 2001.

The fourth attempt at using force was the ill-advised and ill-fated Kargil military adventure in the spring of 1999. Even if the intruders had gained access to the Kargil road, which would have cut off Ladakh from Srinagar, it is difficult to imagine how it would have gained the control of the valley for Pakistan. At best Buddhist Ladakh in which we have little or no interest might have fallen. Our actions were reckless. Would India not have opened new fronts? Would the world powers have allowed a military intervention to break the status quo?

The time has come to face the issue of our supporting or acquiescing in the so-called jihad in Kashmir squarely and honestly. When a jihad kills women and children and unarmed non-combatants, is it jihad or plain terrorism? Are we not degrading the holy concept of jihad by giving blatant terrorism a religious cover? And who has the legal authority in Islam to declare a Jihad? Should it be based on the fatwas given by a bunch of ignorant mullas or the parliament of an Islamic state based on the learned opinion of the Islamic Ideology Council?

Let us recognize the fact that there is a strong fanatical lobby both in our military and in civilian life that believes that `jihadist` terrorism alone can free the valley from Indian rule. Since India has at least 120 million Muslims, why a jihad only in Kashmir and not an all-out jihad against India for the benefit of Muslims residing in India? Are Muslims not killed in Indian Gujarat and elsewhere?

The militarist argument for the Kashmir jihad is that for a relatively small investment from our side we can pin down an Indian army of over half a million. The ratio of expenditure is said to be very favourable to us: one of ours is to fifty of the enemy. However, this argument falls flat if we consider that the GDP growth rate in India at six per cent is twice ours in an economy several times larger than ours. India has the means to sustain its military terror.

Pakistan has consistently denied any aid, training or support for the so-called jihadists. In this we have been economical with the truth. Our consistent denials have seriously eroded our credibility. For so-called patriotic reasons the press too has played down our indulgence in this regard. Jihad has never been debated in parliament.

A Kashmir solution may only be possible once we truly exit out of the trap of these unexamined and unquestioned beliefs. If we wish to come out of the closet, let jihad in Kashmir be discussed openly and decided by parliament. Our secret closet is the ISI, which is the invisible maker of policy and it thrives on open-ended state funding.

If we are to make India a negotiating partner in resolving the Kashmir problem, the cross-LoC movement of jihadists must be reduced to zero. The LoC must be sealed by a combination of joint patrols, UN or international force supervision and new technology such as thermal imaging wherever possible. India makes a mistake by not assisting Pakistan in closing infiltration routes. This will of course not put an end to terrorism; the once-docile Kashmiri now have youths every bit as ferocious as the `Tamil tigers` in Sri Lanka. They don`t need Pakistani support for their own jihad.

There can be no question of equating terrorism with jihad, and those who do so do a serious disservice to Islam. There is also no question but that terrorism is morally repulsive and cowardly in intent and execution, ill-disciplined as much of its force is mercenary and counterproductive in the long run. It stands little chance of success when pitted against an organized army.

We now come to the heart of the problem - the outlines of a Kashmir solution. We need a roadmap no matter how long the road. The recent declaration of Pakistan to front trade and travel should be extended to trade and travel across the LoC by Kashmiris. Our two countries do not have the right to prevent this. The LoC is the outcome of a subcontinental war not intra-Kashmiri strife. A soft LoC will also help end terrorism, just as it did in 1965.

India-Pakistan negotiations on substance should take place in a neutral country such as Finland, Norway or Sweden and away from the glare of publicity, with the hosts preferably sitting as silent observers. A settlement should be reached on the basis of ground realities. The inhabitants of Ladakh and the majority in Jammu are well integrated into the Indian Union, as are those of Baltistan, Gilgit and Azad Kashmir into Pakistan.

These areas should form part of India and Pakistan respectively by mutual agreement. The dispute is narrowed down to the valley for which we have advocated independence as an ultimate goal in course of time. The first step in this regard is the true implementation of Article 370 of the Indian constitution, which concedes a special status to Kashmir. If territories can be apportioned as suggested above to the two countries, the application of Article 370 will be confined to the valley only.

If, however, the Indians are not prepared to show any flexibility on their stand, Pakistan will have to reconsider the Shimla Pact of which the Indian interpretation is a strict bilateral resolution of all disputes.

The key to a saner subcontinent is trade, tourism, an end of press poison and, above all, an end to terrorism.

Let us remember that an unarmed man baring his chest to the bullets of an oppressor is a hero. A sniper gunning down women, children and non-combatants, a coward.


DAWN
M.P.Bhandara
http://www.dawn.com/2003/05/08/op.htm#3

How Muslims Can Win The Coming Wars! Seeing God through another`s eyes
By Aijazz Ahmed

ISLAMABAD - The crux of the message that Pakistani religious leaders are giving to the hardline clerics and their followers is that the Jews and Christians are aiming to eliminate the Pakistani and Muslim world to turn their old dream of Zionism into reality.

``The Jewish lobby and George W Bush intend to eliminate Islam and Muslims as part of their campaign for the supremacy and dominance of their religion,`` said Maulana Fazlur Rehman, the chief clerical supporter of the Taliban in Pakistan. ``The American president and his companions want revenge for the defeat of Christian forces in the crusades of medieval ages,`` he adds. It is a war of dominance and power, either in Iraq or in Afghanistan.

Fazlur Rehman was very clear and categorical in his message and tone, which parallels that of his colleagues in the six-party religious alliance Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA).

And, indeed, the situation between Islam and other religions is not ideal, comments Dr Mehmood Ghazi, former religious minister in the cabinet of President General Pervez Musharraf and an Islamic scholar. Islam is a religion of peace and love that advocates humanity and non-violence, he maintains. But injustice against Muslims and their strong reaction to the violations of rights spreads misunderstandings and mistrust among religions.

``In fact, no-one can be a Muslim unless he accepts other religions as religions of God, and believes that other prophets are right and just,`` Ghazi says. Islam accepts Jesus as the prophet of God, but not the son he adds. ``Our belief does not allow us to reject other prophets, but Islam does not allow polytheism,`` he maintains. ``Jesus Christ cannot be the son of God, as that would be polytheism in our religion - but he is a just prophet, and without this belief we may not be Muslim. But this a minor difference between our religions.``

Fazlur Rehman, on the other hand, does not buy this argument. ``Polytheism is a major difference among us. God does not allow anyone to be shared with him, and Christians believe in Jesus as the son of God. Do you think that it is minor difference? This may change the whole chemistry of the issue,`` he says.

A history of difference
In fact, the differences between Islam and other religions have deep links in history. In the context of the Indian subcontinent, the religious conflict crossed the limits of enmity due to the cruel and bestial attitude of violent Muslim rulers and so-called religious notables toward the local Hindu majority during the Indian monarchy for more than 800 years. History says that from the time of Qutabuddin Aibak, the first formal Muslim ruler in the 13th century, to that of Aurengzeb Alamgir in the early 18th century, all Muslim kings and monarchs killed Hindus to strengthen their rule.

But unfortunately, that was done in the name of Islam, on the advice of courtier mullahs. They propagated the belief that killing of Hindus pleased Allah and earned His blessing. In fact that tactic was in fashion in that time to scare subjects without any prejudice, but unfortunately local Hindus remained major targets, says Dr Mubarak Ali, a well-known Indian historian. ``You can imagine the situation and hate against Islam from the acts of the influential mullahs and rulers of that time,`` he says.

Shah Walli Ullah, the renowned Muslim scholar of 18th century India, called on Hindus ``either to embrace Islam or sink in the Indian Ocean . Hindus are of [a] black creed; they will have to embrace Islam or [they] will have to die in Indian Ocean.``

Mughal emperors also provided harsh and rather insulting treatment to the founders of the Sikh religion for more than 100 years, despite the fact that both Muslims and Sikhs quarreled with each other over the issue of the funeral of Guru Nanak (founder of the Sikh religion). Both were claiming him for their religion to bury him according to their faith after his death. Mughal rulers until Aurengzeb forced Sikhs virtually to live a bestial life in the jungle for more than 100 years, and Sikhs retaliated against Muslims and Islam at the time of partition and migration in 1947. Hundreds of thousands of Muslim families lost their kin and belongings only because of the sins committed by Muslim rulers during the 18th and 19th century.

Since the medieval ages, Muslims were fighting in Europe: they conquered Spain, Italy and a bunch of states in central Europe at gunpoint. No direct evidence of communal genocide against the subjects at the hands of Muslim rulers or scholars is available in Pakistan, but plenty of stories tell us how the Muslim rulers and notables indulged in intrigues and conspiracies to fulfill the intricacies of governance. Despite being a Muslim, the rulers and monarchs opted to kill even their blood brothers to quell threats against their rule. Millions of subjects and siblings were made slaves. These inhuman attitudes and steps proved unwise for not only Muslim societies, but also for the good name of the religion of Islam, which earned a name as a religion that advocates and triggers violence and terrorism.

A tradition of monarchy
Yes, Muslim rulers committed cruelties against poor local subjects - but that was only the tradition of monarchy at that time, comments Qazi Javed, another historian. But the blame should properly be shared by influential Hindus, who were with the kings and who instigated and advised them to crush their Hindu subjects from the lower castes.

Not only the Muslim courtier mullahs, but Hindu priests were also with the kings, says Qazi Javed, so it would be unfair to blame Muslims or Islam for all those crimes. Islam has nothing to do with it. ``I am a liberal and not a religious person, but I believe no religion can order such a type of crime,`` he maintains. ``These crimes were not of Muslims, but of Muslim rulers, and that is a big difference.``

Qazi Hussain Ahmed, chief of Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan (the largest and most disciplined religious movement in the Islamic world), buys the argument of Qazi Javed. With a certain fury, he says, ``What Muslim rulers were committing was also committed by the non-Muslim rulers. Does it mean that Christianity or any other religion was responsible for that? Certainly not. Still, Muslims are subjected to elimination and genocide. What is going on in Israel, Kashmir and other parts of the world? You forget the genocide and cleansing of Muslims in Bosnia and Herzegovina at the hands of Serbs. [Israeli premier Ariel] Sharon is killing Palestinians, they even have torn down their houses. What is going on in Kashmir? Indian forces under a Hindu fanatical political party brutally kill and humiliate the Muslim majority even in today`s modern world. More than 90,000 Muslim Kashmiri have been killed by Indian forces. Hundreds of Muslim girls and women have been raped by Indian forces, and these are not mere claims - the Indian media have reported all these cases. What happened in Gujarat is no more a secret. Even the report of the Indian Human Rights Commission and other agencies suggests it was genocide of Muslims. Everything is being done in a very systematic way.``

Indeed, he says, it is yet another clash of civilizations rather than religions. ``The West with connivance of the Jews wants to eliminate Muslims and Islam. The Koran also points out the intrigues and conspiracies of the Jews and advises Muslim to be careful of them. Either Hindus or Christians, they want a religious monopoly, and that is the reason for targeting Muslims.``

Fazlur Rehman differs with Ahmed on his suggestion that the present crisis is a clash of civilizations, but he feels that if the situation continues, it could be turned into one. Indeed, George W Bush and company have been trapped by the Jews: They want to eliminate Islam as they feel threatened by the sentiments of jihad that God bestowed to the Muslims. Islam is an everlasting and universal religion, and will be the ultimate religion before the Day of Judgment, he opined.

The treatment of the Islamic world by Americans is pathetic and cruel. From Palestine to Kashmir, and everywhere else on the globe, major movements and rebel groups whom the United States terms terrorists are Muslims, continues Rehman. But, in reality, they are running freedom movements. From Moro Muslim rebels in the Philippines to groups in Palestine, Chechnya or Kashmir, all are Muslims - and they are called terrorists. But instead they are fighting for their freedom and justice.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/EC28Df01.html

They Shoot Kashmiri Pandits, Dont They? Farzana,

History of Islamic rule in India is full of violence. Islam was spread through Indian subcontinent ``By Sword``. There wer few peaceful conversions through Sufi missionaries but majority was forced conversion. It would be extremely difficult to have good relations between Muslims and Hindus, given this history.

Check the following article by Aijaaz Ahmed.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/EC28Df01.html


A history of difference

In fact, the differences between Islam and other religions have deep links in history. In the context of the Indian subcontinent, the religious conflict crossed the limits of enmity due to the cruel and bestial attitude of violent Muslim rulers and so-called religious notables toward the local Hindu majority during the Indian monarchy for more than 800 years. History says that from the time of Qutabuddin Aibak, the first formal Muslim ruler in the 13th century, to that of Aurengzeb Alamgir in the early 18th century, all Muslim kings and monarchs killed Hindus to strengthen their rule.

But unfortunately, that was done in the name of Islam, on the advice of courtier mullahs. They propagated the belief that killing of Hindus pleased Allah and earned His blessing. In fact that tactic was in fashion in that time to scare subjects without any prejudice, but unfortunately local Hindus remained major targets, says Dr Mubarak Ali, a well-known Indian historian. ``You can imagine the situation and hate against Islam from the acts of the influential mullahs and rulers of that time,`` he says.

Shah Walli Ullah, the renowned Muslim scholar of 18th century India, called on Hindus ``either to embrace Islam or sink in the Indian Ocean . Hindus are of [a] black creed; they will have to embrace Islam or [they] will have to die in Indian Ocean.``

Mughal emperors also provided harsh and rather insulting treatment to the founders of the Sikh religion for more than 100 years, despite the fact that both Muslims and Sikhs quarreled with each other over the issue of the funeral of Guru Nanak (founder of the Sikh religion). Both were claiming him for their religion to bury him according to their faith after his death. Mughal rulers until Aurengzeb forced Sikhs virtually to live a bestial life in the jungle for more than 100 years, and Sikhs retaliated against Muslims and Islam at the time of partition and migration in 1947. Hundreds of thousands of Muslim families lost their kin and belongings only because of the sins committed by Muslim rulers during the 18th and 19th century.

Since the medieval ages, Muslims were fighting in Europe: they conquered Spain, Italy and a bunch of states in central Europe at gunpoint. No direct evidence of communal genocide against the subjects at the hands of Muslim rulers or scholars is available in Pakistan, but plenty of stories tell us how the Muslim rulers and notables indulged in intrigues and conspiracies to fulfill the intricacies of governance. Despite being a Muslim, the rulers and monarchs opted to kill even their blood brothers to quell threats against their rule. Millions of subjects and siblings were made slaves. These inhuman attitudes and steps proved unwise for not only Muslim societies, but also for the good name of the religion of Islam, which earned a name as a religion that advocates and triggers violence and terrorism.

A tradition of monarchy
Yes, Muslim rulers committed cruelties against poor local subjects - but that was only the tradition of monarchy at that time, comments Qazi Javed, another historian. But the blame should properly be shared by influential Hindus, who were with the kings and who instigated and advised them to crush their Hindu subjects from the lower castes.

Not only the Muslim courtier mullahs, but Hindu priests were also with the kings, says Qazi Javed, so it would be unfair to blame Muslims or Islam for all those crimes. Islam has nothing to do with it. ``I am a liberal and not a religious person, but I believe no religion can order such a type of crime,`` he maintains. ``These crimes were not of Muslims, but of Muslim rulers, and that is a big difference

Basant in Lahore Basant
As a child about 30 years back, I was taught by my teachers that celebrating Basant and flying kites is unIslamic and should be avoided. Students taking a day off for Basant were punished.
The traditions have now changed and Basant is now celebrated at the national level, mixing it with Jashne Baharan.
Being a Hindu festival, it should not be celebrated. Instead Jashne Baharan can be celebrated as such.- DR NADEEM UN NABI, Lahore, via e-mail, February 4.

THE NATION, Pakistan

http://www.sulekha.com/redirectnh.asp?cid=295565