| September 22, 2002 | Sunday | Rajab 14, 1423 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
Deeper shades of paranoia
Powers for private guards
WITH virtually every building in Arafat’s headquarters destroyed, it is not just the Palestinian Authority that is being reduced to dust; the US-sponsored peace process itself is in a shambles. Bit by bit, Israel is destroying not only the few remaining symbols of Palestinian statehood but the very concept of a Palestinian identity is being obliterated. A tunnel also is being dug, thus threatening the very building that houses Arafat. His aides correctly fear for his life, because the building may collapse. Yet, Arafat has shown no signs of flinching: he is there “on the front” irrespective of what his Israeli tormentors are doing to the occupied territories’ defenceless population or personally to him. Evidently, Ariel Sharon does not think time is ripe for eliminating Arafat. But even if he does that, it will hardly solve the problem, for the Palestinians are determined to continue their struggle for freedom no matter what the cost.
The issue which has been at the heart of the conflict in the Middle East since 1948 is the right of the people of Palestine to live in freedom on their own soil. The whole world, including Israel, has conceded this right to the Palestinian people. In fact, the very purpose of the Oslo accords was to finally clinch a “land for peace” deal that would end the Israeli occupation of the Arab territories and give the Palestinians a state of their own. However, after the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin by a Jewish fanatic, Israel started backtracking on the peace process. The accords were signed when Bill Clinton was American president, but it was left to Clinton himself to have those partly re-negotiated at the behest of Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak successively. Painstaking negotiations at Wye, Camp David, Cairo, and Sharm el-Sheikh produced agreements on points of differences. But again Israel failed to conform to the withdrawal schedule.
The situation underwent a dramatic change when Ariel Sharon, not prime minister till then, visited the Islamic holy sites in September 2000 despite being told not to do so. Since then, blood has flowed in Palestine, as it always does whenever Sharon is in command. Regretfully, the US has done nothing to restrain him. George Bush has met Sharon six times, but has not extended the same courtesy to Arafat even once. The greatest disappointment was the US president’s much-awaited “initiative” of June 24 in which he focused more on the personality of Arafat than on the question of Palestine itself. His stock reaction to acts of state of terrorism by Tel Aviv is to repeat the shibboleth that Israel has the right to defend itself against Palestinian violence. This only serves to encourage Sharon in his hubris. Suicide bomb attacks are not going to go away so long as Israel continues to be in the illegal occupation of Palestinian territories. Its ten-fold retaliation policy may cause more Palestinian deaths, but, if the past is any guide, that has not deterred the Palestinian people from continuing their struggle for liberation. The only solution is a resumption of the peace process aiming at the withdrawal of the Israelis from the occupied territories and the creation of a Palestinian state with its capital as Al Quds. It is the realization of this goal that should inform the Bush policy rather than a carte blanche for Sharon’s brand of unilateralism that can only keep the Middle East bleeding and burning.
WHAT many critics have repeatedly said about the Bush administration’s attacks on civil liberties — disguised in the form of draconian legislation like the USA Patriot Act — is gradually coming true. The controversial legislation, passed in response to the Sept. 11 attacks, allows law enforcement agencies to mount all kinds of surveillance operations, including a provision that authorizes the FBI to check library records. A heightened sense of paranoia, coupled with the fact that several million US citizens are themselves of Middle Eastern origin and hence would be liable to racial profiling, has made matters worse. Two recent cases involving American citizens illustrate the point.
The first one relates to three medical interns — two of Pakistani and one of Arab origin. They were stopped on a highway and searched by local police and the FBI for seventeen hours after a woman at a local diner claimed that she had overheard them saying to each other that they supported the Sept. 11 attacks. The second is the case of the six men, all US citizens, accused of being part of an Al Qaeda ‘sleeper’ cell. The only ‘evidence’ linking them to Al Qaeda is that they had allegedly attended a training camp in Afghanistan. Coincidentally, these six men are also of Yemeni descent, and this might go against them. The case of the three interns is even more distressing because neither the authorities nor the media bothered to corroborate the woman’s account with that of other witnesses or with the suspects themselves, who later denied having said anything of the sort. The authorities found nothing incriminating and the three were allowed to go. As if this humiliation was not enough, the Florida hospital they were heading for later told them they would not be taken back.
The phobia that has gripped America as it fights its “war on terror” unfortunately means that even an expression of sympathy for the other side is immediately equated with anti-patriotism — and it helps if the sympathizer looks Middle Eastern. Washington should realize that the paranoia and suspicion bred by its over-arching war on terror could easily snowball into a witch-hunt against its own minorities, the likes of which we may not have seen since the McCarthy era.
THE law allowing private security guards in Punjab to return fire in case of a threat to life or property during robbery or agitation recognizes the dangers faced by them in the line of duty. Commercial organizations often seek the services of private guards for their security, the risks being considerable during transfer of cash. But increasingly, security guards are also being engaged by private individuals for their homes or personal security in a deteriorating law and order situation. Guards admittedly can be exposed to threats to their lives and safety while performing their duties. They naturally cannot be expected to remain sitting ducks when under attacks. In such situations, being allowed to act in self-defence would seem correct. But there would be questions all the same about the likely dangers associated with the use of this empowerment in certain situations.
What with inadequate training and experience, guards may tend to act hastily or erratically, thereby creating a serious law and order situation. Even the police, despite claims of proper professional training, are prone to committing errors of judgment in situations involving crossfire with criminals. The most tragic example of flawed judgment and professional skill in tackling a dacoity was the killing of young children of a judge in Karachi some years ago. It is essential, therefore, that guards be properly trained in the use of firearms and have good judgment in exercising the right of self-defence. The new law has rightly laid stress on training, but a proper system of monitoring the professional competence of guards is also essential.