|
| January 05, 2007 | Friday | Zilhaj 14, 1427 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
Images of blood & gore
Lapses in anti-polio drive
Spirit of pilgrimage
Will the US leave allies behind?
EVERY year millions of Muslims gather in Makkah to reaffirm the universal brotherhood of Islam and invoke the blessings of Allah. The basic rationale of this ritual called Haj is Islam’s stress on the equality of human beings and a return to the consciousness of the need to differentiate between vice and virtue.
ONE day in the Gerald Ford presidency that hasn’t received much attention in the past week’s memorials is April 30, 1975. That was the day the last American helicopter pulled away from the US embassy in Saigon, leaving behind many thousands of South Vietnamese who had worked with the United States.
WITH barely a fortnight to go for the elections scheduled for January 22, Bangladesh has been thrown into a crisis yet again. The opposition 14-party alliance led by the Awami League, as well as the Communist Party and the Muslim League, have announced a boycott of the elections. What is worse is that these parties have also vowed to resist the caretaker government’s plan to hold the polls. All this bodes ill for the country which emerged from the shadows of military rule in 1990 but has failed to consolidate a stable working democracy in the last 16 years. If elections are held without the participation of the major parties, they will lack credibility. If they are not held at all, the constitution will lose its validity. If force is used to prevent the polls, the country will lapse into chaos and it will be back to square one in politics. The fact is that the military’s intervention in politics has been as much of a problem in that country as in Pakistan. The Awami League and the Bangladesh National Party managed to dislodge the army only when they joined hands in the struggle for the restoration of civilian rule.
It is a pity that the two women who lead Bangladesh’s major political parties have failed to learn from their own experience. They forget that they share a common interest in the continuity of democracy and constitutional government. Their inability to cooperate will provide the army an excuse to seize power. It is, therefore, regrettable that Shaikh Haseena Wajed and Khalida Zia have opted for the politics of confrontation and refused to work together as protectors of democracy who are expected to observe the basic rules. Irrespective of who was in office and who was in opposition all these years, each of them made it a point to undermine the other by refusing to cooperate even in matters of wider common interest. When in the opposition, they resorted to strikes and boycotts to paralyse the country’s economy and block the evolution of the democratic process. If Bangladesh has survived and the armed forces have not intervened yet, it is because of the vibrant NGOs that have kept the economy going and the tacit understanding of the party in office not to touch the army’s corporate assets that have grown over the years.
To be sure, the impasse in Dhaka will harm democracy. It simply points to the futility of the Awami League’s politics that its leader has now taken to the road to boycott the elections. The constitutional provision for a caretaker administration to conduct polls was worked out with the agreement of both parties. On Ms Wajed’s demand this time the chief justice declined to head the interim set-up and the chief election commissioner was persuaded to go on leave since his impartiality was questioned. The voters’ list has been revised at her insistence but she has refused to accept the authenticity of the new list. It is ironical that one of her demands is that the ban be lifted on the former military strongman, Hossein Mohammad Ershad, who was ousted from power jointly by the Awami League and the BNP. At this stage can one hope for the success of a democracy in Bangladesh? There are many dangers lurking around that can seriously harm the country. One is the army that can make a comeback. The other is the rise of Islamic extremism that will kill democracy to ensure its own survival.
A LITTLE boy’s tragic death by hanging in Rahimyar Khan raises serious questions about the ethical underpinnings of the Pakistani media, specifically the television channels. The nine-year-old boy died on Sunday while re-enacting a scene that had been shown repeatedly on television — the graphic footage of the hanging of Saddam Hussein. Aided by his ten-year-old sister, the boy accidentally strangled himself with a rope tied to the ceiling fan. The siblings, like most children, were concerned only with the here and now — they were unaware of the full consequences of their actions. At least in this case, there is no doubt that the children’s behaviour was directly influenced by what they saw on television, a medium in which the distinction between real life and entertainment is often blurred. For the kids in Rahimyar Khan, ‘play-hanging’ was probably no different from recreating a shoot-out as seen on television. Instead of toy guns, they used a noose.
Violence on television is not a new phenomenon. But the images are getting more graphic, especially in news bulletins, and the impact such footage might have on impressionable young minds does not appear to be a consideration. This is particularly true of the television industry in Pakistan, which is still in its nascent stage and clearly struggling to come to grips with its responsibilities. The mushroom growth of channels has, moreover, engendered an environment in which only the most sensational can have the lead. In this race for ratings and advertising revenues, shock tactics are a convenient tool for pulling in viewers. This is why news and current affairs programmes are replete with gratuitous images of death and gore which do not add to the viewer’s information in any way. It could be argued that, no matter how sound the reasons, no channel can afford to ignore footage that a rival might carry. The answer lies in collective self-regulation and adherence to a code of conduct of the media’s own making. The alternative — government intervention — holds profound implications for freedom of information as a whole. Once the precedent has been set, other forms of censorship may not be far behind.
THE past year has seen considerable reverses for polio-endemic countries in their battle against the crippling disease. Along with Nigeria, Afghanistan and India, Pakistan has still to be declared polio-free. According to WHO, there were 36 confirmed cases of the disease in Pakistan last year. Out of these 16 cropped up in Fata and the NWFP where conservative beliefs and a difficult terrain prevented vaccination teams from effectively inoculating children in these high-risk zones. In 2005, the same areas had registered only five polio cases, raising hopes that the UN deadline for the eradication of the disease could be met. One year after the deadline, matters appear to be worsening. Concerns are being expressed that the easily transmissible polio virus will cross many borders as indeed it did last year when several countries, previously considered polio-free, reported cases. The situation calls for urgent action — especially by polio-endemic countries — to review efforts for the eradication of the disease and to identify and correct the lapses that have contributed to insufficient vaccination coverage or defective inoculations. No strategy to eradicate polio is going to work unless such a review is undertaken by the health authorities to pinpoint the failings of the current anti-polio campaign so that a clear picture emerges and remedial action taken.
Unfortunately, instead of adapting a holistic approach, the government has opted for piecemeal solutions. For instance, while social factors such as obscurantism have contributed to the regression on polio, these cannot be tackled without taking into account other reasons — medical, financial or logistic - that are responsible for the inefficacy of the current drive. It is only when the health department identifies all factors and comes up with an integrated strategy to correct the flaws and lapses that the fight against polio can be won.
Haj is the annual purpose-specific convention during a specified time, while ‘Umrah’ is a visit to the Kaaba anytime during the year. Both have a sublime objective as the Quran explains although we have reduced them to mere rituals similar, in many ways, to the olden days. The Quranic concept of Haj is an objective reality and a system of collective life with stress on the relationship between man and God.
Haj in the past was a religious-cum-festive occasion with no serious underlining. Islam diverted the tradition to a more dignified and goal-oriented ‘Ibadah’. The Divine revelation, in all ages, has always announced that race, colour, language, nation and nationality can never be the basis of superiority. It has vigorously negated man’s domination by man. It stresses that despite the different nationalities, colours, races and languages, man is still a part of mankind.
This message was given a practical shape by Hazrat Ibrahim who left everything, including his parents, to settle in a desolate place called Bakkah (Makkah) and laid the foundation of a new nation. The first house of worship erected on the face of the earth was the Kaaba in this city; the antiquity of which history fails to reveal with certainty.
From the pre-historic times the Kaaba has always been revered, respected and preserved. It was the only resort of the people of Arabia and the surrounding countries to seek the blessings of God and His benevolence and compassion. When Abraham assisted by his son Ismail was raising the foundation of Kaaba with his own hands, he burst forth into prayer to Allah:
‘Our Lord! Accept from us this duty. Make us true Muslims unto Thee and our posterity true Muslims unto Thee, and teach unto us ways of devotion unto Thee and forgive us. Verily Thou art All-forgiving and All-Beneficent our Lord! And raise up a messenger from amongst them who shall recite unto them Thy revelation and shall teach to them the Book (Quran) and the wisdom and purify them. Verily! Thou art the Al-Mighty , the All-Wise’ (2:127-129)
Allah granted this prayer and in the same auspicious locality was born that leader, guide and benefactor of humanity, Muhammad (SAW), who brought the message of peace and guidance to the entire human race and raised the barbaric Arabs to the highest pedestal of human civilization.
Every ritual in Islam has a logical and explainable reason behind it. The biggest gathering of human beings in one place has a definite purpose of realising and reaffirming total commitment to the Divine Islamic values.
Haj means intention and also ‘prevention’. The intention should be to reunite the divided humanity and establish the domination of the Divine message revealed through Prophet Muhammad. The entire Haj is for Allah and Allah has owned the Kaaba as His house symbolically meaning it is for the benefit of whole mankind. It does not mean the concrete cube but the system around the Kaaba which was established by Abraham and re-established by the Prophet.
The entire humanity is invited to come and see how the established system is beneficent for them (22:27,28). It is the first house of worship appointed for men full of blessings and of guidance for all. In it are signs manifest like the ‘Muqaam-e-Ibrahim’ (Stature of Abraham), whosoever enters it attains security. Pilgrimage thereto is a duty men owe to Allah.
‘Arafat’ (the place where all the pilgrims gather) from which the word ‘Taa’ruf’ (introduction) is devised means that pilgrims should come in contact with each other and there should be mutual consultation for a better understanding of the prevailing problems and their solution. The main Haj sermon from Masjid-i-Nimrah is the guidance and message for all Muslims and that should be adopted in the coming year.
The initial gathering of pilgrims is at ‘Mina’ which also means the ‘city of desires’. In other words those who gather at Mina bring all their desires with them. These desires have to be assessed in the Haj environment in the light of the Quran and selfish desires have to be left behind in Mina before proceeding to Arafat. The compulsory stay at Mina is meant to be utilised by the pilgrims to ponder and redirect their lives on the ‘Sirat-e-Mustaqeem’.
The annual Haj congregation also shows the unity of Muslims. The unfortunate division of Muslims into various sects is against the clear message of the Quran (6:159) strongly condemned by the Quran. From the root word Haj we have the word ‘Hujjat’ which means clear proof, evident, practical and applicable all over the world. Haj is supposed to be the unifying force so badly needed by the Muslim world today. It is not all about the hereafter, it is about first purifying your inner self here and now to lead a good life as emphasised in the Quranic prayer the pilgrims recite ‘Our Lord! Give us good in this world and good in the hereafter and defend us from the torment of hellfire’ (2:20).
Haj is a duty which requires the pilgrims to requite all wrongdoings and seek forgiveness, be kind and bear with others with patience, be generous, support the poor and never forget Allah’s laws of retribution. As a Mehrim (One wearing Ahram) there are no signs of aristocracy or distinction. Animals are not hunted, plants are not uprooted and aggression is replaced by humbleness. A pilgrim should bury selfish ego and remember that he will one day be buried in two pieces of white cloth similar to his Ahram leaving behind all the wealth and worldly belongings and taking along with him only his deeds.
Those wrenching final images of the Vietnam War are relevant now as we think about what lies ahead in Iraq. However long the United States stays in Iraq and whatever success it achieves there, we should agree we have a moral responsibility to the Iraqis who risked their lives and families to be America’s allies.
How America leaves Iraq will be as important as how it entered. That’s why I found the recommendations of the Baker-Hamilton report valuable — because they focused on an orderly process of transition from US military occupation to Iraqi sovereignty, with the assistance of Iraq’s neighbours.
President Bush seems about to embark on a riskier course of a “surge” in American troops to achieve something that looks like military victory. But if that “double-down” bet fails, I fear we will eventually witness a repetition of April 30, 1975 — without the orderly process envisioned by Baker-Hamilton.
America’s ragged withdrawal from Vietnam was chronicled by Frank Snepp, a CIA analyst in Saigon at the time. In his 1977 book, “Decent Interval,” Snepp wrote that the CIA station in Saigon was able to evacuate only about 537 of its 1,900 “indigenous employees” in April 1975. The agency also abandoned 400 members of the CIA-trained Special Police Branch; 400 members of the Central Intelligence Organization of South Vietnam; hundreds of North Vietnamese and Viet Cong defectors; and nearly 30,000 Vietnamese who had been trained as operatives in the CIA’s Phoenix programme. These people were, in practical terms, left to die.
In the pell-mell American withdrawal, wrote Snepp, “We committed the unpardonable mistake of failing to ensure the destruction of the personnel files and intelligence dossiers we had helped the government assemble.” He concluded: “It is not too much to say that in terms of squandered lives, blown secrets, and the betrayal of agents, friends and collaborators, our handling of the evacuation was an institutional disgrace.”
Thomas Polgar, the Saigon station chief, sent a final bleak cable to headquarters: “It has been a long and hard fight and we have lost. This experience, unique in the history of the United States, does not signal necessarily the demise of the United States as a world power. The severity of the defeat and the circumstances of it, however, would seem to call for a reassessment of the policies of niggardly half-measures which have characterized much of our participation here.”
Vietnam and America did indeed survive this trauma — to the point that three decades later, Vietnam is a prosperous and friendly nation visited by American presidents. A big reason why is that after the chaotic withdrawal, America worked to keep faith with people who had been its allies. The brutal policies of the North Vietnamese created waves of refugees who became known as “boat people.” Many thousands of them made their way to the United States, and their children and grandchildren are among our nation’s great success stories.
One of the great tragedies of the Iraq war has been America’s inability to protect its friends in Iraq or to offer them a haven when they were forced to flee the country. The New York Times reported this week that 1.8 million Iraqis are living outside the country, with tens of thousands more fleeing each month. But until recently, the Bush administration had planned to resettle just 500 Iraqis in the United States in 2007. The Times quoted Kirk W. Johnson, a former US aid worker in Fallujah: “We’re not even meeting our basic obligation to the Iraqis who’ve been imperilled because they worked for the US government.”
The Vietnamese who came to America after April 1975 provided a backbone for investment and political change in their home country. Their superpower ally failed on the battlefield, but the Vietnamese who believed in free markets and modern values ended up as the winners.
I want to believe that will happen eventually in Iraq, as well. But one of the worst effects of the war is that it is destroying the educated middle class of Iraq — driving doctors, teachers and business people into desperate exile. When Iraq comes back together some day, will these educated Iraqis be America’s friends, or will they despise us?
Whatever we do in Iraq in coming months, it should include a bipartisan commitment to keep faith with the people who risked everything for a new Iraq — by making room for them in America, if necessary. We need a surge of compassion more than a surge of US troops. —Dawn/ Washington Post Service