|
| November 13, 2006 | Monday | Shawwal 20, 1427 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
Punjab’s development model
Empowering women
Knowledge is the key to progress
Where West meets East
MUCH as we would like to see the resurgence of the Muslim ummah, a reality check tells us that renaissance is a national enterprise and is contingent upon the conditions prevailing in each nation.
AS has been noted by impartial observers of the Muslim scene, terrorism stemming from the rise of religious extremism is basically a conflict within the Muslim world. Osama bin Laden, who epitomises all that the word terrorism stands for, is a product of a Muslim (Saudi) society, and the philosophy that he propounds has gone beyond the borders of Saudi Arabia to influence small sections of Muslims throughout the world. Those who have carried out terrorist attacks on civilian targets in various parts of the world belong to geographically and culturally disparate societies, and they seem to have no remorse for killing innocent men, women and children. That Osama could not turn Saudi Arabia into a base of operations for his movement and had to go to Sudan and Afghanistan shows that no Muslim government — with rare exceptions — is willing to tolerate a philosophy which relies on violence to achieve its aim, whatever it is. The tragedy, however, is that he did manage to win some adherents to his philosophy from among middle-class Muslims throughout the world, including those born and bred in western countries. The reason why many young men are susceptible to extremist philosophies is the condition of most Muslim countries and the continuation of such issues as Palestine and Kashmir, which constantly remind them of the Muslim peoples’ powerlessness and humiliation. The collapse of the communist system is also a factor, for in the aftermath of the Cold War Muslims saw the US emerge as the sole superpower which often acted in a manner that offended Muslim sensitivities. Bosnia was not an issue in the sense Kashmir and Palestine are, but when Yugoslavia, consisting of at least six ethnic groups, collapsed, one could see only Muslims being slaughtered.
For Pakistan the turning point came with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan when this country became America’s frontline ally and served as a conduit for the CIA’s overt and covert aid to the mujahideen. As President Pervez Musharraf has said several times, this was a joint enterprise in which the US and Saudi Arabia were equal partners. But once the Soviets were driven out, Pakistan was left to fend for itself. While Afghanistan plunged into civil war, Pakistan became home to religious militants who often defied the government and used the madressahs as training and recruiting grounds for their cause. No wonder the foreign media invariably links every act of terrorism to madressahs in Pakistan, even if the terrorists are born and bred abroad. The chief of Britain’s MI5 now says that most of the 1,600 suspects in Britain had links in Pakistan.
Pakistan must fight terrorism in its own interest because, as US Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher said on Friday in New Delhi, Pakistan itself has been a victim of terrorism. The task is not easy, for an ideology cannot be rooted out by force alone. Basically, it is the task of the teachers, intellectuals and the ulema to challenge those who preach and practise violence in the name of Islam. The government, while being firm, must rely on a political approach to tackle the problem. What happened at Bajaur is unlikely to help Pakistan. In fact, such rash actions drive even the moderates into the hands of extremists. The government cannot fight terrorism solo; it has to have the cooperation of all sections of politicians and the intellectuals and ulema to fight a sustained battle against extremist elements.
WHILE the Punjab government can rightly claim credit for having made some strides in improving the public health and education systems, a lot more needs to be done in these and other social sectors. Acknowledging the accomplishments of the provincial government and the need for more funding, President Pervez Musharraf has assured Lahore of financial help with the province’s ongoing development projects. These include the setting up of a well-equipped sports city near the provincial capital, restoration of Lahore’s historical walled city, restarting the stalled mass transit project, establishment of a cancer hospital in the public sector, installation of water filtration plants at the union council level throughout the province, and streamlining of basic healthcare units and primary schools in rural areas. It is commendable that the Punjab government has come up with a formula to offer better pay and other incentives, including transport, to doctors and paramedical staff for them to render services in remote areas. The policy has been working and needs to be emulated by the other three provinces which, like Punjab, can also request the federal government for additional funds for the purpose.
The initiatives taken by the provincial government in the development sector too are coming to fruition and have been acknowledged as such by international development agencies. The Sundar industrial estate near Lahore has now become operational; work on similar ventures planned around Multan and Faisalabad is also in full swing. Side by side, better road networks are being developed linking the major cities with far-flung rural areas. These are pointers to a working development model having been put in place which too can become an example for the other federating units to follow. What the country needs badly are a housing policy, a national drainage programme and a stricter clean environment policy for the people to benefit more effectively from the development taking place in the socio-economic sector. These are areas in which Punjab, left to its own resources, fares no better than the other federating units. Given their limited means, the provinces cannot perform these tasks unless helped by the centre.
IT is heartening to know that foreign aid groups are investing in women in places like Azad Kashmir by training them in skills that will enable them to earn for themselves. This will empower women as it will help them become self-reliant and therefore more confident and self-assured. As things stand, Pakistan has one of the largest gender gaps in literacy in the world with women in rural areas particularly affected. The literacy rate for women is 35 per cent and only 22 per cent of girls complete primary school compared to 47 per cent of boys. Girls who drop out of school go on to work at home, doing household chores or taking care of the family’s livestock. One should appreciate those aid groups which set up projects that teach women how to read and write and do basic maths, along with imparting healthcare tips and skills like sewing and embroidery which will help them become earning hands. Once women are taught how to earn money for themselves, they can play a crucial role in their family’s well-being and future. They can also become active members of their community and play a useful role in changing hidebound attitudes.
Women’s participation is crucial in strengthening the war on poverty and hunger. This is not an insurmountable task but it calls for the government’s support and assistance. This is especially so in remote areas where the good work being done by NGOs is being resisted, with their women workers threatened by conservative elements who do not want to see women step out of their homes. It is this retrogressive attitude, prevalent all over the country, which needs to be tackled. Education can play a pivotal role in this regard. Apart from repealing discriminatory laws, the government must educate the people on giving women proper respect. Only then will women feel truly strengthened.
There is much that unites the members of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference and there is much more that needs to be done, especially with regard to building up their synergies to promote common economic interests. These bonds would help build bridges across differences of geography and history and levels of development that otherwise have their own dimensions.
No less important are the different ways in which state and society are organised in their respective countries. Those amongst them that nurture knowledge and apply this to their problems and create an infrastructure of governance that ensures equal opportunities and equality before law are already on their way to reaping the benefits of a renaissance. Malaysia stands out as a success story here.
The recent discord and disharmony witnessed over moon-sighting for Eid-ul-Fitr celebrations in Pakistan must have embarrassed all including the principal players. It also dispelled illusions we may have been nurturing about our enlightenment since even when knowledge was available, we were neither willing nor able to apply it to solve this recurring discord.
Divergence of views is inherent in the structure and operating systems of moon-sighting Ruet committees. But the solution exists in the pool of knowledge of astronomical sciences and technology. Although Muslims benefit from innumerable products and services of science and technology, only Turkey among the OIC countries is making use of this pool of knowledge.
We have to answer some fundamental questions on this point. Do we appreciate the value of time and understand that time is the most scare resource of them all? Do we agree that knowledge has solutions to our problems if only we open our minds to its expanding universe? Do we desire a culture that values clarity over confusion, certainty over ambiguity and creates time for productive and rewarding work that would benefit tens of millions of Muslims themselves? And do we acknowledge that work is worship too?
The miracles of the mind occur in cultures where open and enquiring minds are encouraged and time is valued as a precious resource. Such an environment makes it possible for minds to find answers to real problems facing society and state. As things evolve and new issues arise, knowledge evolves also and is applied by trained minds to address new challenges and to find answers to overcome them.
How close are the OIC countries to creating a culture in their societies that values time, and recognises knowledge as a source of value?
Because knowledge is indivisible and incremental, a value system that does not encourage minds to use scientific knowledge and technology for such an elementary application as moon-sighting, cannot hope to be creative in other disciplines of knowledge or to use their advanced versions for solving bigger and more complicated issues. This would ensure continued dependence upon whatever solutions are provided by others, whether the issues are simple or complex.
Would the Europeans and others with a similar mindset have been able to create new instruments of wealth and power, comfort and convenience if their minds were similarly handicapped? Would there be, for instance, cameras, televisions, airplanes and other miracles that people of all races and religions so proudly use and benefit from?
Or even more relevant in our context, would there ever have been a man landing on the same moon over whose sighting we cannot agree upon? And without these and a thousand other products and services since developed by open and creative minds, would our world in the 21st century have been any different from the one in the 15th century?
The human mind has always been, but more now than ever before, the source of wealth, power, and control over everything. And if Muslims win the battle of minds, they would also be able to win the battles of economy, politics and power. But clumsy minds lose even winning battles as should be obvious to all of us.
As important as the interfaith dialogue is the dialogue amongst the sprawling members of the community to win the minds of Muslims. And the OIC can help in promoting such a dialogue to reduce disharmony if not promote the unity of minds. So can the international community, although the shock and awe methods adopted by some of its important members in Muslim lands have created their own problems in international cooperation.
These are not the battles that the neo-cons are fighting with shock and awe to win the hearts and minds of Muslims. Nor can the battle for the minds of Muslims be reduced to fighting terrorism. In any case, these political battles are already being lost in Muslim countries as several worldwide surveys and opinion polls indicate. They are also being lost in several western countries as indicated by the testimony provided by the latest public opinion surveys conducted in the UK, Canada and Mexico.
This battle of ideas is essentially an internal battle in Muslim societies and cannot be waged in proxy by others, since the infrastructure necessary for winning the battle has also to be constructed by the nations themselves.
The dire need for winning the battle of Muslim minds should also be obvious when we remember the frequent failure of our institutions to deliver to their people, despite the resources and other critical assets that society is endowed with. This has often been the cause of frequent moaning and groaning in the Muslim world and even tensions and troubles, some of which are now spilling across their borders. But we forget the fact that institutions reflect the values of the society that spawns and nurtures them.
The failure of laws and institutions to deliver the goods to the Muslim masses only means that important segments in their societies have a mindset that does not actually believe in the values these institutions are supposed to protect and uphold.
The failure of institutions in several Muslim countries is therefore a reminder of the need for winning the battle of minds to uphold these values. That is why the value system a society upholds is a sine qua non for the success of its institutions and instruments of governance.
If they create a culture that harnesses the power of knowledge and opens their minds to reorganising state and society which in some cases are obstacles to their advancement, a Muslim renaissance would have arrived and the sky would be the limit to the achievements of the people.
The future has not yet arrived. And minds find answers to problems; let there be no doubt on that score. Therefore, the minds they produce and nurture would determine which of the member countries of the OIC would have a future different from the past 300 years of their history.
Email: smshah@alum.mit.edu1
BULENT ECEVIT, one of the most important leaders in modern Turkish history, died Sunday in Ankara. His dream may be dying a slow death in Brussels, Belgium. “There can be no Europe without Turkey, and no Turkey without Europe,” Ecevit said in 1999. A four-term prime minister, Ecevit was by the end of his career a supporter of open markets and greater integration with the West. On Wednesday, the European Commission released a progress report on Ankara’s bid to join the European Union. It was highly critical of the pace of Turkey’s reforms on issues such as freedom of speech and its failure to recognise Cyprus.
Cyprus is indeed the stumbling block of the day, but there is a more fundamental resistance across much of Western Europe to the idea that Turkey could join the EU. The EU is still digesting 10 new Central and Eastern European members with a lower standard of living, and there are some understandable concerns about absorbing 73 million Turks on the continent’s periphery.
But the genius of Europe’s enlargement process has been its ability to raise living standards in new member states while being flexible in phasing in full integration so as to not drag down living standards among richer members. Because of the terms of Poland’s accession to the EU, for instance, its farmers have not impoverished French farmers. What’s more, given demographic trends, Europe would increasingly benefit from Turkey’s large labour pool and its vibrant consumer market. Opposition to Turkey’s candidacy in nations such as France is increasingly about cultural identity. This is unfortunate, as it undermines the idea of a largely secular Muslim Turkey serving as a bridge between West and East. Its successful integration with Christian Europe would demonstrate that the religions need not be at odds and that Western-style democracy is not unattainable in the Middle East.
But confronted with European rejection, many sectors of Turkish society seem intent on derailing integration, making the Turkey-isn’t-suited claim a self-fulfilling one. Turkey’s Article 301, a vague law that makes it a crime to publicly insult the nation, is a nationalist measure aimed at provoking Brussels. And then there is Cyprus, which joined the EU in 2004 and thus has the ability to block any new members. Turkey invaded Cyprus in 1974, under Ecevit, and part of the island remains under Turkish control while Ankara refuses to recognise the Cypriot government. Talks to resolve the impasse recently collapsed. At an EU summit in mid-December, commissioners may decide to suspend accession talks with Turkey for a year or more. That would be unfortunate — for both sides of this courtship.
— The Los Angeles Times