Pages

Preventing Further Radicalisation Is the Challenge Muslims Must Undertake: Some Concrete Suggestions

Now the question is, how do we go forward? If we really want to make a difference, we will have to start a substantive dialogue with the ulema and make sure that they agree to...

Is It Time Muslims Standardize A Contextual Qur'an, Asks A Reader. Yes, Perhaps, But Building A Quran-Based Islam, Shorn Of Deviations, Will Not Be Easy.

What do you mean by logical order, Hamza Saheb? Do you mean chronological order, which would also restore primacy to Meccan verses of universal significance? After all, it's in a chronological order that early Muslims including the Prophet (saw) must have understood and memorised the Quran. They could not have memorised contextual verses that had not been revealed yet, as those situations had not arisen by that time.

Facing The Jihadist Challenge: Muslims Need To Refute Jihadis’ Xenophobic, Supremacist, Millenarian Thesis And Focus On Islamic Pluralism, Says Sultan Shahin At UNHRC In Geneva

Facing the brutalities of Islamist terror, while President Obama will not go beyond calling it violent extremism, the head of Sunni Islam's oldest seat of learning, Jamia al-Azhar admitted in a counter-terrorism conference in Mecca that extremism was caused by “corrupt interpretations of Quran and the sayings of Prophet Muhammad”, and Islamic curriculums needed to change.

Facing The Jihadist Challenge التحديات الجهادوية: المسلمون بحاجة لإبطال نظريات الجهادويين المتعصبة والمعادية للأجانب بالتركيز على التعددية الإسلامية، يقوله سلطان شاهين في مجلس حقوق الإنسان

إن المرء يتصور أن أتباع الإسلام الذين آمنوا وكثير منهم يؤمنون بالتأكيد، أن الإسلام هو دين الروحانية والسلام والتعايش والتسامح، سيكونون مع السلاح ضد ما يسمى الدولة الإسلامية. ولكن في حين أن الاستنكارات الروتينية من بعض المقاطع تأتي في بعض الأحيان، لا يوجد هناك الغضب الواضح في المجتمع المسلم. العالم يلاحظ أنه في حين أن عشرات الآلاف من المسلمين يخرجون إلى الشوارع للتظاهر في وقت هناك ادعاء مما يسمى الكفر ضد أي واحد، لا يكاد أن يحتج أي مسلم على وحشيات لا تعد ولا تحصى يرتكبها الإرهابيون الإسلامويون. من

C’est idéologiquement que les musulmans doivent affronter le terrorisme islamiste : une réforme de l’Islam est nécessaire

Nous vivons à une époque de terrorisme islamique. Au massacre d’enfants à Peshawar a succédé le massacre de journalistes à Paris. Treize ans après le 11 septembre, le monde se trouve face à une menace plus complexe, plus diverse et plus dangereuse. Alors que l’accent a été mis sur l’action militaire à l’encontre des terroristes, le défi que représente leur idéologie est resté dans une large mesure sans réponse.

Wednesday, October 12, 2016

The Significance of the Martyrdom of Imam Hussain



By Naved Ahmad
12 October 2016








Women mourn as they watch a Muharram procession in Ahmedabad, India. ─ Reuters
Dear Editor,
I am not a Shia, I am not a Sunni and besides being a Muslim I am the best of the best creation of The ALMIGHTY, that is human (Al Insaan). I am the best of the best creation, primarily, because the grandson of the very best among the best of the best creation, the son of the finest man and the most pious lady among us, lives in my heart. He is my hope in despair, he is my prayers, and he is my strength in trials and tribulations. He is an ideology; He is truth and justice embodied. He is an answer to every tyranny and atrocity of the world. He is neither for Shia nor for Sunnis and obviously not for Muslims. Let humanity awaken, and every tribe will claim him as their own. Hussein is for humanity.  
Mahatma Gandhi quoted:
“If I had 72 companions like Husain, I would have freed India in 24 hours, from British”. Gandhi, the champion of non violence himself, further added “the progress of Islam does not depend on the use of sword, but on the supreme sacrifice of Imam Hussein, I learnt from Hussein, how to achieve victory whilst being oppressed”.
The little writer in me, never wanted my mother to finish the story of Karbala, as she herself could not hold her tears, while describing the utmost gruesome tyranny on humanity. As, I grew up, I read Karbala and understood the essence of supreme sacrifice from the leader of all the martyrs. I could differentiate, being a victim and a survivor.
 The martyrdom of Hussein is supreme in every sense and he will be the leader of all martyrs because of the fact that he just not defeated Yazeed; he defeated every tyrant, despot and diabolical propaganda they carry against humanity. Karbala is just not about making Islam alive and a triumph of good over evil it’s a tight slap on Iblees.  It’s a reminder to him, that we are our Lord’s best of the best creation and we love our Prophet Muhammad SAW more than anybody in this universe. We may be clay and we may go astray but we will keep humanity alive because Imam Hussein is our heart, Prophet Muhammad SAW is our love and The ALLAH is our Almighty.

Read more »
10:02 AM Moderate Islamist here No comments

Maulana Wahiduddin Khan on Anti-Muslim Sentiments



By Maulana Wahiduddin Khan for New Age Islam
12 October
Q: In recent years, there’s been an escalation of anti-Muslim sentiments in many countries. In parts of the West, for instance, there have been cases of Muslims being turned away from restaurants, of Muslims being physically and verbally abused, of Muslims being asked to get off a plane because someone else wrongly suspected and accused them of being terrorists, of Muslim women being dismissed from workplaces because they insist on wearing the Hijab, of local non-Muslims protesting against plans for building mosques, and so on. The latest such development is in France, with the ban on what are called Burkinis in many French cities.
What do you think are the reasons for these growing anti-Muslim sentiments?
A: The answer to this question can be found by studying a verse in the Quran. In this verse, the Quran says: “And beware of an affliction that will not smite exclusively those among you who have done wrong.” (8:25)
If we study this Quranic verse and objectively apply it to the present situation of Muslims, we realize that what is happening in the world today is not due to “anti-Muslim sentiment”. Rather it is a reaction to Muslims’ own negative activities.
Muslims say that instances of terrorism are perpetrated only by some Muslims, and not the whole Muslim community. This claim of Muslims could be right, but another serious aspect of this matter is that Muslims to this day have not unequivocally disowned Muslim terrorism. I don’t know of a single person in the entire Muslim world who openly condemns Muslims’ negative activities. If any person does speak on this topic, he would speak with twists. For example, some would say, ‘It is true that Muslims are involved in terrorist activities, but this action of theirs is a reaction: they are reacting to others’ discriminatory behaviour towards them.’ This kind of condemnation is certainly not condemnation. Rather, it is akin to indirectly justifying the violent actions of Muslims.
Objective analysis tells us that such instances that you cite are certainly not discrimination. Rather, they are a result of Muslims’ own doubtful behaviour. Muslims are themselves responsible for this discrimination. According to a hadith, the Prophet said: “Save yourself from being regarded as objectionable.” Because Muslims do no outrightly disown the actions of those Muslims who are engaged in wrong actions, others in the community will also face ‘discrimination’. If Muslims were to clearly condemn the actions of those who are doing wrong, then only those specific persons who are guilty of the wrong would face the above kind response, which is termed ‘discrimination’ or ‘anti-Muslim sentiment’.
Q: Some Muslims may respond to displays of anti-Muslim sentiment by protesting against them and denouncing what they say is discrimination against them. They might, for instance, campaign for a boycott of a restaurant where Muslims have been turned out from. Or, they may demand that an airline company whose employees had made a Muslim passenger disembark from a plane, wrongly suspecting him to be a terrorist, should issue an apology. Or, they may insist that countries pass stricter laws to counter anti-Muslim discrimination.
What do you think of this approach to countering or overcoming anti-Muslim sentiments?
A: These cases are due to the law of nature. The solution to them is not that countries pass anti-Muslim discrimination laws. There are only two options before Muslims. First, they should declare that they are not a single community. Rather, the case of every individual Muslim is separate and distinct. Thus, if anything happens with a Muslim, Muslims as a whole should not make it their own case but should look at it only as the case of a particular person. However, if Muslims cannot take this option and do consider themselves as a single community or ummah, they should condemn, in clear terms, those among them who engage in negative activities. If they do not condemn these persons, then the rest of the world would surely infer from the wrong actions of these particular Muslims that the entire Muslim community is responsible, because Muslims themselves say that all Muslims are members of a single ummah or community.
Such instances of discrimination as you have cited in your question happen on a regular basis with secular persons, but the rest of the secular world does not look at it as a matter of the “secular community”. In the secular world, each person is looked upon as distinct. There is no “secular Ummah”. So, when such cases happen with secular persons, the sentiments of secular people do not get hurt, because secular people do not regard themselves as a single community. They regard this as a problem pertaining to those specific individuals. But when such cases happen with Muslims, the sentiments of the entire Muslim community get hurt. What happens with one Muslim affects the whole of the Muslim community. This is why when one Muslim performs a wrong action, the world begins to doubt other Muslims too. In order to avoid this, either Muslims should very strongly condemn those individual Muslims among them who are doing wrong, or, if not this, they should abandon the concept of the Ummah: that is, every Muslim’s case is his own and what he does has nothing to do with other Muslims.
Q: How effective do you think this approach that many Muslims advocate—of protesting against what is termed ‘Islamophobia’—might be in changing the hearts and minds people who may have negative views of Muslims?
A: This approach of Muslims cannot change others’ views about Muslims. The only way to change this situation is that Muslims should reform themselves. Demanding others to change cannot at all be of any use in this regard.
Q: If you don’t think this approach is effective in this regard, what alternate approach do you think Muslims should adopt to help others change their opinions about Muslims and Islam?
A: The starting-point in this matter is that all those who are representatives of Muslims should openly disown Muslims’ terrorist activities. They should prevent Muslims from engaging in terrorism, and if this is not possible for them, then they should clearly condemn these actions by Muslims.
Q: Complaining against and denouncing anti-Muslim sentiments represents one approach that seeks to improve relations between Muslims and others. It is a negative approach, in that it is against something. But there is a very different approach to the issue—a positive approach based on seeking to improve others’ perceptions of Muslims and Islam by doing good to others, serving them and being kind and helpful to them, even in the face of discrimination from them. This is a constructive approach, in contrast to the first one. It is about doing something positive, instead of denouncing something negative.
Which of these two approaches would you suggest Muslims should adopt and why?
A: The only way to change the perception of people about Islam and Muslims is for the representatives of Muslims to condemn the wrong actions of Muslims. For example, all Ulema should collectively issue a fatwa unconditionally denouncing the negative activities of Muslims.

Read more »
10:01 AM Moderate Islamist here No comments

If Sharia Is Divine, Why Don’t Ulema Demand Medieval Punishments Of Flogging, Amputation And Beheading For Muslims?



By Sultan Shahin, Founding Editor, New Age Islam
14 September 2016
Muslim media is in a state. Acclaimed poet and writer Javed Akhtar has rightly condemned the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) “in the strongest words” for justifying the instant divorce prevalent in India. In its affidavit filed in the Supreme Court, the AIMPLB had defended the practice of triple talaq and polygamy, professing that “polygamy is a social need and a blessing and not a curse for women.
The Muslim reaction to Javed Akhtar’s tweet can be summed up by what Khalid Yunus Ansari wrote in Pratap of 11 September: “There has never been any dearth of opportunists and traitors among Muslims. These people may appear intelligent and educated but are ignorant of Muslim mores. … A real Muslim is one who consciously and even sub-consciously believes in and follows Islamic Laws, someone who cannot even imagine finding fault with or challenging or violating any of them. Even imagining any fault with Muslim Laws is absolute kufr (disbelief), not to speak of expressing such thoughts.”
I have been reading Urdu newspapers for 45 years. While Muslims have been constantly fighting for the so-called Muslim Personal Law which allows them to treat women as inferior beings, never have I come across any Muslim demand for being governed by Islamic criminal laws. If Sharia is so important, if it is such a vital part of our faith, then why this dichotomy? Except for drinking alcohol, punishments for all other hudud crimes (mentioned in the Quran, considered crimes against God) are to be amputation, flogging and beheading. One would have thought that at least those Muslims who are so particular about following Sharia, and, of course, all ulema who consider Sharia divine, would demand the implementation of the entire Sharia. Why follow only the part that helps keep women subjugated and avoid those that may lead to severe medieval punishments specified by Quran and Hadees.
Triple talaq or instant divorce is one of the evils emanating from the personal laws instituted for Muslims by the British. Hardly any Muslim in India follows the Quran-based practice of divorce in three stages, encompassing three menstrual cycles. After Independence from the British, a united Pakistan had refused to accept the Anglo-Mohammedan Law and reformed its personal law in 1961. These reforms have passed the test of time. Pakistan has since gone through much upheaval including an era of Nizam-e-Mustafa under General Ziaul Haq, in which even traditional pre-Islamic forms of punishment like whips and lashes and public flogging were practised for Hudud violations. So what progressive Muslims in India should be and indeed have been demanding for long is reforms in Muslim personal law itself. But perhaps we should also be demanding that those who claim to believe in the divinity of Sharia should be punished in medieval Hudud ways. If the government cannot reform Muslim Personal Laws, out of deference for ulema’s views, it can at least extend Hudud punishments to them. Ulema say Muslims have to be fully Muslim, accept Sharia laws literally, not be partial Muslim. The ulema must be given the option to face medieval Hudud punishments and be fully Muslim according to their own interpretation.
Reform of Muslim personal law is urgent. A demand for this has been made for decades. This is inevitably opposed and equally inevitably exposes the two-facedness of Islamic fundamentalists. India should not tolerate these archaic and un-Islamic personal laws.
But, to my mind, the most important benefit is the opening up of a theological debate within the community. This has already started to a certain extent.
Reacting to Dr Tahir Mahmood’s recent call for reform, AIMPLB’s Secretary Maulana Khalid Saifullah Rahmani made a dangerous and subversive statement. He said: “This issue is not related to the laws of the country but it is an issue related to Fatwa. Hence this issue should be dealt with by reliable scholars of Islamic jurisdiction.”
The clerics questioning Supreme Court’s jurisdiction should understand that the Muslims are as much subject to the Indian Constitution and its interpretation by the Supreme Court as any other citizen. Muslim personal law is a part of the Constitution and the Supreme Court has every right to interpret it. Progressive Muslims are not committing a sin by encouraging the courts to intervene in the matter.
The most important outcome of this debate, however, is that it is breaching the complete stagnation in Islamic theological thinking. This is essential to replace the current theology of violence, exclusivism, xenophobia and intolerance with a new Islamic theology of peace, coexistence, inclusiveness, pluralism and gender equality.
Note: This article was first published in India Today’s Daily newspaper Mail Today and its online newspaper Daily “O”.

Read more »
10:00 AM Moderate Islamist here No comments

Sultan Shahin Raises Triple Talaq Issue at UNHRC, Asks Muslims to Engage In Serious Rethinking Of Islamic Theology and Bring It In Line With the Needs of 21st Century



UN Human Rights Council, Geneva,
Agenda Item 9, General Debate, 26 September, 2016,
On behalf of: Asian-Eurasian Human Rights Forum
Oral Statement by Sultan Shahin, Founding Editor, New Age Islam

Mr. President,
While the world’s attention is focused on violent extremism practised by a section of Muslims, gross violations of human rights are taking place in various Muslim societies in the name of religion.
In a South East Asian country, the Arabic name of God is monopolised by Muslims. Non-Muslims using the traditional term Allah for God are punished.
In a South Asian Muslim country thousands of Hindu and Christian girls, many under the age of 18, are abducted, forcibly converted to Islam, and then “married” to their abductors.
In a Middle Eastern country, courts allow marriages of as small as 9-year-old girls and force them to consummate their “marriage” and live with their husbands.
In my own country, India, Muslim husbands can utter the word talaq, meaning divorce, thrice in a row, and legally throw their wives out of their homes in less than a minute.
While these are gross violations of human rights, they also amount to denigrating the religion of Islam.









Many criminal acts including terrorism are being practised as if they have been ordained by Islamic scriptures. (Photo credit: Reuters)
All these and many other similar social evils and criminal acts including terrorism are practiced as if they have been ordained by Islamic scriptures.
This calls for deep introspection in the Muslim community. We Muslims should not allow our religion to be hijacked in this fashion.
Mr. President, I would like to make a request, through you, to the representatives of Muslim countries in the Council.
Dear Sirs, Madams, Please start a serious dialogue with theologians in your countries and ask them to open the gates of Ijtihad, the creative re-thinking. This was not only permitted, but ordained by God, in Islam’s primary scripture, the holy Quran, as no other Prophet was to come after Mohmmad (saw).
We Muslims must revisit our theology in the light of the needs of the 21st century. We are not living in the 7th century and can neither fight those early battles nor organise our societies in that medieval fashion.
<>

Related Articles:
Note: The above speech in UNHRC has also been published by India Today's online newspaper Daily O and is available on:


Read more »
9:57 AM Moderate Islamist here No comments

Enjoining Good and Forbidding Wrong



By Maulana Wahiduddin Khan for New Age Islam
07 October 2016
In various parts of the world today, Muslims are engaged in acts of violence. If they are told to stop this, they claim: “We are only doing what the Prophet of Islam commanded us to.” In this regard, they cite a hadith that orders the believers to rectify a wrong:
He who amongst you sees something wrong should try to rectify it with the help of his hand; and if he has not strength enough to do so, then he should do it with his tongue, and if he has not strength enough to do so, then he should abhor it in his heart, and that is the least of faith. (Sahih Muslim)
This hadith is cited by some people in order to claim sanction for violence, although actually the hadith does not mention violence. This hadith speaks about reforming or rectifying a wrong. If one does not have the ability to rectify the wrong, then the hadith says, one should speak out against it. The hadith certainly does not say that on seeing something wrong one must begin to unleash violence against people or resort to suicide-bombing. One cannot derive sanction for violent activities from this hadith.
This hadith talks about Taghayyur-E Munkar, which means rectifying or remedying a wrong. The Arabic word Taghayyur means ‘replacement’. Hence, in the above hadith, the word Taghayyur means replacing a condition of evil or wrong with a condition that is not evil or wrong. In other words, this hadith ordains the reforming of a certain condition, not engaging in conflict and causing destruction.
The well-known Arabic dictionary Lisan al-Arab explains the word Taghayyur as follows: ‘Taghayyur means to change something. That is, to change it into something that it had not been earlier.’ (5/40) The eleventh-century Muslim scholar of Quranic exegesis and the Arabic language, Raghib al-Isfahani (d.1108) has written a dictionary of Quranic terms, Al-Mufradat fi Gharib al-Quran, in which he explains the word Taghayyur thus: “It is said ‘I changed (Taghayyur) my house’, which means that you changed the construction of your house and constructed it anew.” 
Today, in various parts of the world violence is taking place in the name of jihad. This so-called ‘sacred violence’ is being led by self-styled Muslim leaders. And in this, almost all Muslims are involved in some way or the other, because those Muslims who are not directly engaged in this violence are silent about it. From the Islamic point of view, this silence of theirs is tantamount to indirect involvement. Hence, according to Islamic principles, the entire Muslim Ummah will be considered to be engaged in this violence—some people directly, others indirectly.
Facts tell us that this violence has produced no positive results at all. There is only one result that is following everywhere from this violence— and that is, destruction and nothing constructive at all. In this situation, then, one can, without any doubt whatsoever, say that these violent acts are definitely not Taghayyur-e-Munkaror rectification of any wrong. Rectifying a wrong means changing an undesirable situation and bringing in a desirable situation in its place. In contrast, any action that proves counterproductive is definitely destruction, and in no way an Islamically-desirable action.
A negative reaction to an unwanted situation leads to violence and conflict. It is notTaghayyur-e-Munkar or rectifying a wrong. Rectifying a wrong is a completely positive action. It is undertaken to bring about reform in a given situation, not to make the situation even worse.  Reforming a situation requires that one analyze it with an unbiased mind and then undertake efforts to reform it through constructive planning. Those who act contrary to this are, without any doubt, unleashing destruction and not carrying out reform.

Read more »
9:55 AM Moderate Islamist here No comments

Monday, September 12, 2016

Zakir Naik’s Open Letter: Democrat or an Islamo-Fascist Demagogue?



By Arshad Alam, New Age Islam
12 September, 2016
It is rather rich of Zakir Naik to write an open letter to the government about his perceived sense of persecution at the hands of Indian authorities. As I have written in previously, every person including Zakir Naik should be probed within the due process of law. To create conditions in which he is forced to live outside India without a clinching evidence is hardly excusable. That he is followed by thousands of Muslims who have not become terrorists is proof enough that there is a complex set of causative factors behind every act of terror. A complex phenomenon such as terrorism should not be simplified as the result of the teaching and sermons of some individual.
Zakir Naik’s letter however goes further. It accuses the government of the day of selectively targeting Muslims. Zakir Naik becomes the victim within this narrative by becoming one of the 170 million of India’s Muslims.
The problem starts right here. A majority of Muslims here are poor and uneducated and mostly do not have a voice. On comparison, Zakir Naik owns a million-dollar enterprise and has a powerful lobby fighting for his defence. How then can he compare himself with the average Indian Muslim?
Moreover, Zakir Naik speaks openly against the religious practice of the majority of Indian Muslims. He has accused them of being open to polytheism and not following the correct tenets of Islam. How then does he become one of them? Clearly his ideas about Islam is much at variance with that of the majority of Indian Muslims. And that’s precisely the reason why he cannot represent the majority of Indian Muslims. For almost all major schools of Islam in India, barring Salafi-Wahhabi-Ahl-e-Hadeesi, Zakir Naik represents something other than Islam; in fact, the majority even refuse to certify him as a religious scholar.
It sounds patently hypocritical when Zakir Naik talks about ‘murder of democracy’ and violation of ‘fundamental rights’. Of course, all this is peppered by the undertone of ‘justice’ which he argues has been denied in his case. Talking in terms of democracy and rights would almost make Zakir Naik a believer in these secular ideas. However, all his own speeches and conduct have belied this.
A person who sings praises for the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, accepts their hospitality and prize is now talking about democracy and human rights. Why didn’t he remember them when the Saudis gave him millions to promote their ideology of Islamism? As a champion of democracy, why did he accept Saudi money when it is well documented that there are flagrant violations of all kinds of rights in that kingdom. What kind of democracy is he talking about when his mentor hangs and stones people for petty crimes in full public view?
There cannot be any doubt that Zakir Naik is talking about democracy and rights without even believing an iota in these concepts. After all, didn’t his Islamist predecessors argue that democracy was a system of men and what they wanted was to bring the system of God? Has Zakir Naik all of a sudden turned secular when confronted with man-made laws?
In the same letter, Zakir Naik argues that he is promoting peace and harmony in society through developing an understanding of Islam. Again, he probably knows that this is not the case. Through his erroneous understanding of the text, he has created newer religious schisms within the Muslim society so much so that there was a fatwa against him. If he cannot create harmony even within Muslim society, then heaven only knows how he is going to create peace and harmony within the Indian society. His sermons actually have the opposite effect: of promoting enmity between different religious groups in society.
If one is hell bent on arguing that Islam is the best religion in the world and that polytheism of the Hindus is a backward and deplorable religious worldview, then how does this promote peace and tolerance? If he continues to justify that Islam alone is the saviour of world, then how does this promote peace and mutual respect? Calling such sermons of a third rate pedant as dialogue militates against the very idea of a dialogical plural world. Zakir Naik is not interested in dialogue: he is a fascist demagogue who wants the entire world to convert to his point of view.
His hypocrisy on democracy begins to unravel the minute he takes recourse to the Quran. There are many passages within the text to cite in terms of pluralism and tolerance. But to quote the verse which tells Muslims to be patient and wait for their eventual victory over the polytheists is perhaps too much. This is not a man who is a believer in the virtues of secular laws like democracy. This is a man who wants to unfurl the Islamic flag everywhere, demean and trounce all other religious traditions. The recourse to democracy and the language of rights are only a means to an end: that of establishing the supremacy of Islam.
Arshad Alam is a NewAgeIslam.com columnist.
- See more at: http://newageislam.com/radical-islamism-and-jihad/arshad-alam,-new-age-islam/zakir-naik%E2%80%99s-open-letter--democrat-or-an-islamo-fascist-demagogue?/d/108534#sthash.kzc5CHl9.dpuf

Read more »
9:30 AM Moderate Islamist here No comments

He May Have Insulted Obama, but Duterte Held up a Long-Hidden Looking Glass to the US



By Adele Webb
09 September 2016
At a press conference at Davao International Airport on Monday, on his way to meet US President Barack Obama and other leaders attending the ASEAN summit, Mr Duterte muttered a few short words in tagalog at the end of a lengthy and irritated reply to a local journalist. With those words, he again made international headlines.
If that were all there was to it, we could rightly roll our eyes and move on. After all, Mr Duterte's language is vulgar; his slander of people and groups is liable to incite violence; and his determination to kill drug pushers (to fight "crime with crime") an abuse of power. He should not be defended for any of this.
But as someone who has spent a long time studying US-Philippine relations, I think there's something more for us to see here.
And if we want to judge the Philippine President (and, by default, the nation for electing him) from high moral ground, I think we have a responsibility to pay attention to it.
 








PHOTO: School Begins: Uncle Sam lectures his class in Civilisation. The pupils are labelled Philippines, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and Cuba. (Supplied: Puck Magazine 1899)
Restoring an Invisible History
Who is he to question me about human rights and extrajudicial killings?
So asked Mr Duterte on Monday. It's actually a very good question, and one long overdue from a Philippine president. The extent to which the violence of US relations with the Philippines has been made invisible by a history written predominantly by Americans themselves cannot be overstated.
It began with a three-year war (1899-1902) that most Americans have never heard of. The war overthrew a newly independent Philippine republic and cost between 250,000 and a million Filipino lives — only to be called "a great misunderstanding" by American colonial writers.
After all, the US had chosen the Philippines to be its great Asian "showcase of democracy". The invasion was a benevolent act.
Hence the complete erasure of acts of American violence from the Philippine national story.
You don't need to be a conspiracy theorist to smell something rotten. Since the 1950s Philippine writers, academics, journalists and so on have been trying to reframe the historical narrative to point out this fact: to be invaded by a military power, told you don't possess the character or capability for self-government, and then controlled by another nation for four decades, to the occupier's lucrative commercial benefit, was not to be the recipient of a benevolent act.
Even at the time the war was taking place, one of America's best-loved authors was writing just as much. Mark Twain was prolific in writing about the paradox of the "democratising mission" to the Philippines.
Penned in 1901, but still stunningly poignant, is this extract from his essay, To the Person Sitting in Darkness:
The Person Sitting in Darkness is almost sure to say: 'There is something curious about this — curious and unaccountable. There must be two Americas: one that sets the captive free, and one that takes a once-captive's new freedom away from him, and picks a quarrel with him with nothing to found it on; then kills him to get his land.'
In America, these remain Mr Twain's least-known works.
Before his (now regretted) distasteful remark, Mr Duterte had much to say in response to the question about being confronted over human rights in an upcoming meeting with Mr Obama.
He was responding to murmurs from critics that, if he wouldn't listen to anyone else about the extrajudicial killings in the Philippines, just wait until he meets the US President.
No-one seems to have listened to or cared much about the other six minutes of Mr Duterte's reply. So let me tell you something about it.
It was a reclaiming of the historical narrative of Philippine-US relations, a holding up to the US of the hidden "looking glass" Mark Twain had written about 100 years earlier.
An Assertion of Independence
Calling out the hidden insinuations, as Mr Duterte did, that the US continues to have authority over the politics of the Philippines, is bold and brazen, but reasonable. Consider his statement:
I am a president of a sovereign state. And we have long ceased to be a colony. I do not have any master but the Filipino people.
These words are less evidence of his demagoguery or an intention to personally disparage Mr Obama than a reference to history, and are more accurately read as such.
After World War II, colonies of any sort, even the so-called "democratic" US one in the Philippines, were on the nose. But this didn't stop Washington officialdom from continuing to claim the right of access to the Philippines' political and economic realms.
When the US finally granted the Philippines its (second) independence in 1946, it required the new republic to amend its constitution so a bill could be passed that, as well as legislating preferential trade conditions for the US, would grant American citizens equal rights with Filipinos to Philippine natural resources. It was the beginning of a new phase: neo-colonialism.
It was not just a matter of political interference and the power to make or break Philippine presidents with endorsement and strategic financial support. In a visceral sense, the nation was always being watched and judged by its democratic "teacher".
Asked about being confronted with human rights concerns by Mr Obama, Mr Duterte said:
You must be kidding. Who is he to confront me? America has one too many to answer for the misdeeds in this country ... As a matter of fact, we inherited this problem from the United States. Why? Because they invaded this country and made us their subjugated people ... Can I explain the extrajudicial killing? Can they explain the 600,000 Moro massacred in this island [Mindanao]? Do you want to see the pictures? Maybe you ask him. And make it public.
I'm reminded of a comment by Alicia Garza, a founder of the Black Lives Matter movement ignited by police killings of black Americans. Speaking in Sydney last weekend at the Festival of Dangerous Ideas, she related how, when civil rights protests get uncomfortably heated, she is often asked: "Why are they so angry?"
She paused. Then softly giggled, giving the audience time for the ludicrousness of the question to sink in.
Duterte Shocks with Trash Talk
Rodrigo Duterte hypnotised his fans and outraged critics throughout an explosive election campaign.
Why is the Philippine President so angry about the prospect of the US President confronting him about human rights abuses? History.
As Mr Duterte said himself on Monday, violent acts of the past don't stay in the past. They get passed on from generation to generation, especially when the injustice goes unacknowledged and unaddressed.
It is difficult to stomach Mr Duterte's style. It certainly is difficult to look past the serious issues raised by his administration's "war on drugs". We should condemn his misuse of power.
But if we condemn the president for his recent remarks because we claim to be concerned about the rights of Filipinos while showing no interest in acknowledging the past crimes and injustices against the Philippines, we fall into our own sort of hypocrisy.
Let's be honest, if Mr Duterte didn't curse and swear and offend our sensibilities, would we be paying so much attention to the Philippines?
For once, I heard a Philippine president holding the US to account for all its doublespeak and hypocrisy in US-Philippine relations. And I couldn't help but appreciate that.
Adele Webb is a PhD researcher in the Department of Government and International Relations, Sydney Democracy Network, at the University of Sydney.
Source: abc.net.au/news/2016-09-09/he-may-have-insulted-obama2c-but-duterte-held-up-a-long-hidden/7830872?section=analysis
- See more at: http://newageislam.com/current-affairs/adele-webb/he-may-have-insulted-obama,-but-duterte-held-up-a-long-hidden-looking-glass-to-the-us/d/108537#sthash.izzab4oK.dpuf

Read more »
9:29 AM Moderate Islamist here No comments

Making Change in Northern Nigeria: Somebody to Look Up to



By Cathy Russell
09/09/2016









Amina Yusuf
The first time Amina Yusuf left the borders of her native Nigeria, it was on the trip of a lifetime. She joined five other girls who were selected to see Malala Yousafzai accept the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo at the end of 2014. In that moment, she realized that the world was paying attention to adolescent girls.
This meant a great deal to Amina, who has experienced difficult challenges growing up in northern Nigeria. She’s managed to overcome them with support from her family and non-profit organizations, and today, Amina gives back to other girls in her community through mentorship and advocacy.
When I travelled to Aubja, Nigeria last month, I met with Amina to hear about her work. We talked about why the United States cares about girls around the world and how we support adolescent girls in different countries. I asked her about the challenges—and opportunities—she sees for women and girls in northern Nigeria.
Here are edited excerpts from our conversation. We spoke in English and through a translator.
Ambassador Russell: How did you get into the work you’re doing?
Amina Yusuf: After my primary education, I had slim chances of proceeding to secondary school but with the help of Centre for Girls’ Education, I was enrolled in secondary school and also became a cascading mentor. My role is to assist in mentoring young girls in literacy and numeracy, life skills, and adolescent reproductive information.
Russell: And this is in your community.
Amina: Yes. In my community, not everyone supports girls’ education. People prefer boys to become educated.
Russell: Is that because of cost—of books, uniforms—that they don’t have enough money to do both, so they choose the boys? Or do they just not see the value in getting a girl educated?
Amina: Mostly, it’s because of the cost. And another reason is they don’t see the importance. After a certain age, a girl will move to her husband’s house. She’ll have to get married.
Russell: At what age do girls typically get married in your community?
Amina: 13.
Russell: And how old are the boys when they get married?
Amina: The man, sometimes, it’s at the age of 35.
Russell: And when the girls get married, do they start having children?
Amina: Sometimes immediately. Within nine months, she’ll have a baby. My mother encouraged me to attend school regularly. Of course, my father supports my education. He allowed me to be in school instead of marrying.
Russell: Why do you think your dad was in favour of education, given that there are pressures to get girls married?
Amina: After he married my mom, she dropped out of secondary school. He was educated, so he wanted my mother to continue. So even after they got married, he allowed her to continue.
Now she is the most educated person in our community. She is still doing a distance learning program. She’s somebody to look up to. And she’s one of the reasons why members of the community allow their girls to continue their education.
Russell: One of the things I hear a lot from girls is that, in addition to going to school, they have to do so much other work around the house. They have to care for other siblings. They have to get the water. They have to make the meal, clean up the meal. Is that typical here in Nigeria, where the girls do most of the work?
Amina: In northern Nigeria, even if a girl is in school, she must come home, do the cleaning and take care of things at home. Parents groom their daughters to become wives and mothers.
Russell: What needs to happen for change in Nigeria?
Amina: The change needs to start with the government. The government needs to put policies in place that ensure girls are in school, and that when girls are at home, there should be shared responsibilities. If a girl cooks dinner today, the boy should cook tomorrow. If there is equity, things will work out better.
Russell: In the United States, we’ve heard a lot about the Chibok girls who were taken in 2014. Is safety at school an issue that girls think about in the northern part of the country?
Amina: This issue of insecurity, we cannot say it is gone. It is still there and the girls are afraid. Most of the routes to school are not safe. And sometimes girls get raped on their way to school, and nobody is really sure whether school is safe or not.
Russell: Someone told me that attitudes here about women are not great, generally, that men are in control of the family and the political sphere. Is that your impression—that women don’t have a lot to say about what goes on?
Amina: Most people tend to look down on the female. They always think that the woman cannot reach where she intends to.
Russell: What do you want people to know about Nigeria, the future of Nigeria, and the importance of girls?
Amina: If girls are educated and allowed to reach their maximum potential—to become a president, governor, and women in strategic positions—things will change.
Source: huffingtonpost.in/entry/making-change-in-northern-nigeria-somebody-to-look_us_57d2bf0de4b0eb9a57b7a6e1?timestamp=1473430224647
- See more at: http://newageislam.com/islam,-women-and-feminism/cathy-russell/making-change-in-northern-nigeria--somebody-to-look-up-to/d/108541#sthash.hhe2Dsmf.dpuf

Read more »
9:28 AM Moderate Islamist here No comments

Media in Pakistan Is Under Siege



By Ambreen Agha
September 12, 2016
My family has been falsely implicated in drug racket. It is distressing to see that my family is suffering because of my profession. It is difficult to be a journalist in Pakistan and that too in tribal areas. You are punished for bringing out stories that do not sit well with the military establishment, which is ubiquitous here. We see Taliban commanders visiting military quarters in the tribal belt. What happens inside is not for us to know. We are caught between the military and the terrorists. Being a journalist has cost me my family, who disowned me after the slapping of false charges. And now I am without money, looking for alternative means of sustenance.
------An unnamed journalist from an unspecified location in tribal areas to SAIR.
Media in Pakistan, particular in the tribal regions, is under siege. Working under constant threat to life and livelihood, media personnel have faced a backlash from both state and anti-state elements. These include the warring political parties, military intelligence agencies and terrorist formations operating across the country.
As freedom becomes increasingly elusive for media personnel in the country, the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) report, released on February 3, 2016, noted that Pakistan runs fourth on the list of the deadliest countries in the world for journalists, recording a total of 115 killings since 1990. According to partial data compiled by Institute for Conflict Management (ICM), a total of 57 journalists have been killed in targeted attacks since 1994 (data till September 11, 2016). Meanwhile, the World Press Freedom Index - 2016, published by Reporters without Borders (RWB), ranked Pakistan at 147 out of 180 countries. The RWB Report on Pakistan, "Targeted on all Sides", states,
Journalists are targeted by extremist groups, Islamist organizations and Pakistan's feared intelligence organizations, all of which are on RSF's [Reporters Sans Frontières] list of predators of press freedom. Although at war with each other, they are all always ready to denounce acts of "sacrilege" by the media. Inevitably, self-censorship is widely practiced within news organizations.
In a recent incident on August 22, 2016, a group of Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) workers attacked the office of ARY News Channel, killing one person and injuring several others, near Zainab Market in the Saddar Town of Karachi, the provincial capital of Sindh. A day earlier, another group of infuriated MQM protestors had damaged the Digital Satellite News Gathering (DSNG) van of the Samaa TV channel in the Liaquatabad Town of Karachi. The protestors involved in both these attacks had alleged lack of "due media coverage" of MQM workers, who had been protesting since August 18, 2016, against the random disappearances and arrest of party workers by the paramilitary Rangers ever since the beginning of the ongoing 'Targeted Action' against terrorists and criminals in the commercial capital. During a meeting of the Sindh Apex Committee headed by Chief Minister Murad Ali Shah on August 31, 2016, Rangers Director General Major General Bilal Akbar informed the participants that 848 'target killers' involved in 7,224 cases have been arrested since September 4, 2013, in Karachi, of which 654 suspects were affiliated with MQM. The MQM suspects have allegedly confessed to being involved in 5,863 incidents of target killings.
In the past, religious-political parties have also brazenly attacked the media. Following the hanging of Mumtaz Qadri, an Elite Force commando convicted of killing former Punjab Governor Salman Taseer, angry protesters attacked media houses and facilities in Sindh and Punjab on March 1, 2016, leaving over half a dozen media people injured, and equipment burnt or destroyed. Qadri was executed on February 29, 2016, at the Adiala Jail in Rawalpindi District of Punjab. The most violent attack occurred in the Hyderabad District of Sindh, where a demonstration was staged by several religious parties against Qadri's execution. The collective call for protest outside the Hyderabad Press Club was given by different religious organizations and parties, including, Milli Yakjehti Council, Jama'at-e-Ulema Pakistan (JuP) and Pakistan Sunni Tehreek (PST). Apart from burning tyres and blocking roads, the enraged mobs burned a counter at the Hyderabad Press Club, injuring four journalists and a Press Club employee. They also beat up journalists en route to Karachi. Two journalists, who were travelling to cover the protest in Karachi's Malir Town were pulled out of the car and beaten up. The cameraman was also dragged out of the van. The infuriated protestors damaged the camera and the vehicle.
The media has been targeted by the country's proliferation of terrorist formations. On May 7, 2016, unidentified terrorists killed two people, including Shia religious scholar and rights activist Syed Khurram Zaki and his journalist friend Rao Khalid, in North Karachi Town. While Khalid was currently working as a journalist, Zaki was a former journalist. No outfit claimed responsibility for the attack.
On November 22, 2015, unidentified armed assailants shot dead TV journalist Hafeez ur Rehman (42), on the outskirts of the Kohat District in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
Though terrorist outfits, primarily the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), have claimed responsibility for these attacks, the media has been directed by the Pakistan Army not to report.
The unnamed journalist from tribal area, in a conversation with this writer, stated,
Since the launch of the NAP [National Action Plan (NAP), media's coverage of the conflict in Pakistan and more specifically in the tribal area is dictated by the Army. There is a clear instruction to all journalists, independent or affiliated, working in the tribal belt to not report claims of responsibility by terrorist outfits. The military has drawn the line for the journalists working on the ground. There are claims made by the Pakistani Taliban [TTP] after every attack that we are categorically told to ignore. Reporting a terror claim is a crime now. In the tribal areas, reporters risk it all to deliver the news independently and objectively. Instead, it is the Army's media wing, the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), which has increased its activities in the last few years.
The 20-point NAP came as a counter-terrorism measure on December 24, 2014, after the gruesome December 16, 2015, Peshawar Army Public School massacre.
Corroborating this claim, the last attack on the media claimed by TTP was on January 17, 2014, when at least three Express News workers, identified as driver Khalid, technician Waqas and security guard Ashraf, were shot dead after TTP terrorists ambushed a stationary DSNG van near Matric Board Office in the North Nazimabad Town of Karachi. In a live telephone call from Afghanistan TTP spokesman Ehsanullah Ehsan declared,
We accept responsibility. I would like to present some of its reasons: At present, Pakistani media is playing the role of (enemies and spread) venomous propaganda against Tehreek-e-Taliban. They have assumed the (role of) opposition. We had intimated the media earlier and warn it once again that (they must) side with us in this venomous propaganda (sic)."
Five days later, on January 23, 2014, TTP issued a 29-page fatwa (edict) against the media, declaring it a "party to the conflict" in the country. Since TTP's creation in 2007, this was the first ever fatwa issued by the terrorist organization against the media, drawing up a hit-list of journalists and publishers across the country. The fatwa accuses media of siding with "disbelievers" against Muslims in the "war on Islam". It alleged that the media was inciting people against mujahidin (holy warriors) through propaganda, and was propagating promiscuity and secularism. One of the author's of the fatwa, Sheikh Khalid Haqqani, 'deputy chief' of TTP, separated journalists into three categories - Murjif, Muqatil and Sa'ee Bil Fasad. Explaining the terms further in the fatwa, Haqqani stated,
Murjif is someone who engages in propaganda against Muslims during a war between Islam and disbelief. Muqatil is someone who incites disbelievers and their allies to act against Muslims, while the third category (Sa'ee Bil Fasad) includes those who allegedly corrupt Muslim society through steps like replacing Islamic ideology with secular beliefs.
While sending the fatwa to Dawn, the outfit's spokesman Ehsanullah Ehsan warned, "Media could mend its ways and become a neutral entity. Otherwise, the media should not feel secure. A few barriers and security escorts will not help. If we can get inside military installations, media offices should not be too much of a challenge."
Indeed, at least 13 attacks with nine fatalities have been recorded since the declaration of the fatwa on January 23, 2014.
The military establishment has played a malicious role in this enduring wave of intolerance against the media. During the 139th Corps Commanders Conference held at the General Headquarters (GHQ) on June 9, 2011, the then Chief of Army Staff (CoAS) General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, warned critics to stop trying to deliberately run down the Armed Forces and the Army as an institution, and to put an end to "any effort to create divisions between important institutions of the country." The Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and other Pakistani intelligence agencies have a long history of intimidation, abduction and secret killings of those who challenge or expose them.
One prominent incident in this category was the abduction, torture and brutal murder of Asia Times Online Pakistan Bureau Chief, Syed Saleem Shahzad, on June 1, 2011, in the Mandi Bahauddin District of Punjab Province. Shehzad was abducted on May 29, 2011, by the ISI just one day after he exposed links between al Qaeda, a group of naval personnel and the ISI, in the deadly attack on the Pakistan Naval Station (PNS) Mehran within the Faisal Naval Airbase in Karachi on May 22, 2011. 10 Security Force (SF) personnel were killed in the attack. Shahzad's killing was a deliberate and planned targeted killing that sent shock waves through Pakistan's journalist fraternity and civil society.
In another such attack, Hamid Mir, the anchor on Geo News, was shot at and injured by four unidentified armed pillion riders on April 19, 2014, in Sharah-e-Faisal Town of Karachi. Before the attack, Mir had told his colleagues and friends that if he was attacked, Pakistan's ISI, "and its chief Lieutenant General Zaheer-ul-Islam will be responsible". On the day of the attack, Geo News disclosed that Mir had also sent a recorded video to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) implicating the ISI in any possible attempt on his life. Mir had claimed that the Agency had been infuriated by his Capital Talk programmes that criticised ISI's tactics against the separatists in Balochistan, where the military is accused of enforced disappearances and killings.
Persistent efforts by the Army and its agencies to silence the media over decades have diminished the spaces of freedom within Pakistan. There have been serious concerns voiced by activists regarding the "muzzling of free speech" in Pakistan. Expressing concern over the role of the ISPR department on June 15, 2016, Asma Jahangir, former chairperson of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP), appeared before a two-judge Supreme Court bench consisting of Justices Ejaz Afzal Khan and Qazi Faez Isa, which was hearing petitions filed by journalists Hamid Mir, Absar Alam and others, seeking a court order abolishing the secret fund being maintained by the Information Ministry. Jahangir asserted that ISPR should also be monitored by regulatory authorities and requested the Court to investigate the law under which the Army's media cell was operating. "We have been talking a lot about the civilian government, but the media cell of the [army] should also be monitored," Jahangir argued.
In the ongoing "war of ideologies", as TTP spokesman Ehsanullah Ehsan called it after the January 17, 2014, attack on Express News, the media has borne the brunt from all the three quarters - political, military and terrorist. An environment of repression has been created, enforced by an unholy alliance of Islamist extremists, radicalized political parties and the omnipresent Army and its agencies, within a culture of enveloping immunity, expanding spaces for future ideological wars.
Ambreen Agha is a Research Associate, Institute for Conflict Management
Source: South Asia Intelligence review
- See more at: http://newageislam.com/islam-and-the-media/ambreen-agha/media-in-pakistan-is-under-siege/d/108542#sthash.QuoYrlpi.dpuf

Read more »
9:26 AM Moderate Islamist here No comments