Waziristan attacked

THE pre-dawn raid on a village near Angoor Adda in the South Waziristan agency by US Special Operations forces on Wednesday has unleashed a storm of protest in Pakistan. The deaths of civilians — a report in this paper put the toll at 20 — including women and children is shocking and has rightly been condemned by Pakistani officials in the strongest terms. Given the secretive nature of such operations and the remoteness of the area affected, one can be sure that the Americans will deny any wrongdoing. Some facts, however, are undeniable. The helicopter raid by the US Special Operations forces — not under the Nato command in Afghanistan — is the first publicly acknowledged raid on Pakistan territory by the Americans. All evidence of recent weeks points to the fact that the raid will not be the last of its kind: “There’s potential to see more,” a “senior US official” has told the New York Times.

The background to Wednesday’s raid is the losses that US and Isaf forces have been suffering in Afghanistan this year. The loss of 45 troops in August was the bloodiest month for foreigners in Afghanistan in their near seven-year presence there. US losses for the month were nearly equal to those in Iraq, where the Americans have four times as many troops. Much of the rising violence in Afghanistan has been blamed on elements operating from Pakistan’s tribal agencies, and Waziristan — north and south — has been a particular cause of concern. Confronted by this increasingly lethal threat, the US and Isaf forces appear to have become increasingly trigger-happy. Afghan officials have strongly protested a series of recent civilian deaths, most notably the alleged massacre of 90 civilians in another pre-dawn attack in the Herat province on Aug 22. American officials have denied this claim. In early July, according to an Afghan government commission, the US mistakenly bombed a wedding party in Nuristan province, killing 47 civilians. That incident too was strongly denied by US officials initially, before it was later accepted that civilians may have died in the attack — though no casualty figure was given.

In light of these events, yesterday’s comment by Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi that the coalition forces operating in Afghanistan “will have to review their policy” is correct. Mr Qureshi was right in pointing out that civilian casualties of the kind suffered in South Waziristan “only fuel hatred among the tribal people”. There is no doubt that the militants operating in Pakistan’s tribal areas pose a threat to not just the Americans and other foreigners in Afghanistan but to Pakistan itself. They must be dealt with — and dealt with forcefully. However, a go-it-alone strategy by the US inside Pakistan will spell nothing but trouble for everyone.

‘Historic’ Cyprus meeting

GIVEN the difficulties in the way, it would be premature to be optimistic about the outcome of what is being called a “historic” meeting between the Turkish Cypriot leader and his southern Greek “comrade” on Wednesday. Even though they have met before, Wednesday’s meeting between Presidents Mehmet Ali Talat and Demetris Christofias marks the official beginning of the peace process aimed at ending the island’s 34-year-old division. What spurred the move toward unity talks was the coming to power on both sides of left-leaning intellectuals. Talat was elected president in 2005 while Christofias defeated the hard-liner President Tassos Papadopoulos in February to become the first communist head of a European Union state. Because of their common leftist background Talat and Christofias have been able to strike a working relationship and refer to each other as “comrade”. It was because of this coincidence that in April there was a breakthrough when a Nicosia crossing was formally opened, and hundreds of people crossed the border both ways in a festive atmosphere.

Both sides have pledged to unite the island, with the two communities running their zones but represented abroad by a central government. But it is difficult to see how the northern entity can be absorbed into a united republic. Another major question is the presence of 40,000 Turkish troops in the north. Given the distrust between Turkish and Greek Cypriots, it would not be easy to end the division and pull the Turkish troops out, unless the northerners, who will be in a minority in a united Cyprus, feel a sense of security in a mutually acceptable new arrangement.

Turkey has a stake in a Cyprus solution, beause the lack of progress on the issue is a major hindrance in its entry into the EU. More importantly, the Greek Cypriot state, which is officially recognised by the EU as representing the entire island, has a veto on a new member’s entry. Mindful of this, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has welcomed the negotiations, though he hoped that the principle of ‘bi-zonality’ would be upheld. Both Talat and Christofias have expressed optimism in guarded terms and hoped that a unity formula could be found by the end of the year. Nevertheless, mindful of the pitfalls ahead, the two have decided to keep the talks open-ended. A lot depends upon these two men. As an analyst put it, if they do not succeed, nobody can.

Road to nowhere?

THE realisation that culprits responsible for the collapse of Karachi’s Shershah Bridge last September remain unpunished to date is sad but hardly a surprise. The government had ordered a speedy inquiry by a six-member committee into the debacle that took six lives, while dozens were trapped under its mangled concrete for over seven hours until rescue teams arrived. The caving in of the colossal structure which cost Rs3.5bn also halted the famed Northern Bypass project. According to a senior official in the communications ministry the people responsible for the accident had escaped action “due to their influence within the power corridors” . It is also alleged that the still undisclosed findings of the report blame the private consultant for its faulty design. The government had promised that perpetrators would be made to bear the cost of the reconstruction of the bridge and will also be charged with criminal negligence. However, the fact that in July, authorities sanctioned an agreement worth Rs274m for the purpose has done little to raise official eyebrows. Meanwhile, the human cost is in dire danger of falling by the wayside as compensation that was announced for the six families has not seen the light of day. For the injured, of course, it was plain bad luck.

The delays in bringing culprits to book have not only raised public scepticism about the involvement of power-mongers, but have also made official claims of justice and compensation ring pathetically hollow. It is claimed that the megapolis of Karachi can look forward to some 50 projects of similar magnitude, but at this rate, these promise a perilous journey rather than a smooth passage. Therefore, legal experts and town planners emphasise that it is vital that results of public inquiries be made visible for future security measures to be foolproof and impenetrable. On the other hand, the civil society must exercise its right to be involved in the selection of consultants for such major projects. After all, be it damage or inconvenience, it is the citizenry that is hit hardest by these calamities. Needless to say, there is no safety mechanism like accountability and this is also crucial if people are to have faith in their rulers and their undertakings.

OTHER VOICES - Pushto Press

Suspending operations

Wahdat, Peshawar

THE Pakistan government has decided to suspend military operations in the tribal areas. Advisor to the prime minister, Rehman Malik, while talking at a press conference in Islamabad the other day ... said that the operation had been suspended in the month of Ramazan but that those who violated the ceasefire would be dealt with accordingly. He said that the decision had been taken to uphold the sanctity of the holy month of Ramazan.

On the other hand, NWFP Chief Minister Amir Haider Khan Hoti has said that death and destruction in the Pashtun belt occur because of the situation in Afghanistan. He explained that a foreign hand is involved in the instability of the tribal regions and reiterated that foreign elements are still present in the tribal regions. The objective of foreigners fighting in the tribal areas, the NWFP chief minister said, is to weaken Pakistan.

Both the above statements have come at a time when people from Bajaur and Swat have had to leave these areas in utter helplessness owing to the fear of being caught in the crossfire between the military and the militants. The displaced from Bajaur and Swat have started living with their relatives outside these areas or in camps established by the government.... [The camps] are experiencing a dearth of basic amenities.

Most families from Bajaur and Swat had to save their lives by fleeing areas of high-intensity conflict without taking with them the necessary belongings such as clothes and bedding. Women, children and the elderly all had to leave their homes in order to save their own lives; these families had to start living on the roads and on farms without anything to wear, eat or drink.

The tragedy of this human displacement is unprecedented. This is an issue which needs immediate resolution. It is not only the responsibility of the provincial NWFP and federal government to take immediate measures to mitigate the unimaginable suffering of the displaced, it is also the responsibility of the people and governments of other provinces of Pakistan to help these people with the basic requirements for their survival.

The government’s decision to suspend operations should be commended as it honours the sanctity of Ramazan but as the chief minister of the NWFP has said the role of a foreign hand in the turmoil in the tribal areas cannot be ignored. It is, therefore, of utmost importance to identify the root causes of the unrest during Ramazan. There is also an urgent need to ponder over a comprehensive strategy to deal with the turmoil and find ways to flush out foreigners from the area. It is a well-known fact that unless the foreigners are pushed out of the borders, peace in Pakistan will remain an unfulfilled dream. — (Sept 1)

— Selected and translated by Khadim Hussain

Gender justice in Islam

If someone asks me which is the most gender-just religion in the world, I would unhesitatingly say ‘Islam’. However, Muslims are seen today as most unjust towards their women, particularly their wives and daughters.

Recently I was shocked to read in the press that in Balochistan parents buried their daughters alive after shooting them and Senator Israrullah Zehri from that province justified it. Nothing could be more unfortunate.

The Qur’an which all Muslims believe to be the divine word strongly condemns the pre-Islamic practice of burying the girl child alive. On the Day of Judgement the Qur’an says the perpetrator would be asked: “For what sin was she killed?” (81:9). And this is still going on in the 21st century in a country which calls itself an Islamic republic. What could be more shocking?

The Qur’an is the first divinely revealed Book which accords not only equal dignity but also equal rights to women in the most unambiguous way. It declares in the second chapter (Surah Baqarah), verse 228: “And women have rights similar to those against them in a just manner.” All commentators agree that this is declaration of equality of rights for men and women. Maulana Abul Kalam Azad in his commentary on this verse in his Tarjauman al-Qur’an says that (this verse) is a clear declaration of equality of sexes more than 1,300 years ago.Apparently the reason for killing those girls in Balochistan was that they intended to marry men of their choice.

It is well known that in Islam marriage is a contract and no nikah can be valid without specific consent of the woman. The Qur’an itself describes marriage as mithaqan ghalizan i.e. strong covenant. A contract cannot be unilateral. Both parties have to agree to it. Thus in Islam for a nikah to be valid two adults have to bear witness that such and such woman has agreed to marry so and so.

Not only that, the woman has every right to stipulate conditions under which she wants to marry and if the man does not agree to these conditions, marriage cannot be valid. Also, according to the Hanafi school to which a large number of Muslims adhere, a woman can also insist on what is called tafwid-i-talaq i.e. delegation of the right to her to divorce her husband on his behalf. Has this any parallel in any religious law in the world?

Also, since marriage is a contract, if a woman is married off in childhood by her wali she has the right to reject the marriage on achieving puberty. It is called in Shari’ah terms khyar al-bulugh i.e. option at puberty. Thus for a girl child if she is married off during her childhood she has the option to accept it or reject the match on achieving adulthood.

Thus in Islam the right of a woman to marry a man of her own choice is quite absolute, given by God, and not even her father can take it away from her. There is no way she can be married off without her specific consent in most unambiguous words. No school of Shari’ah law allows a man to marry a woman without her consent. This rule is firm like a rock.

Also, if man has hidden certain facts from his bride at the time of nikah (i.e. that he is impotent or HIV-positive, for instance), she is entitled to dissolution of her marriage as a matter of right. However, if a man discloses such facts before contracting nikah and she marries him knowing fully well, she will not be entitled to dissolution of marriage on those particular grounds.

Islam has also given the woman the right to liberate herself from a marital bond (khula’) and this right of hers is also absolute. I had read a few years ago that a woman from the Frontier province was murdered by her parents because she wanted divorce from her husband. Samia Sarwar was murdered in her lawyer’s office. There was little public uproar among Muslims, which was equally shocking.

The Holy Prophet (PBUH) allowed a woman called Jamila to obtain khula’ from her husband though he loved her and gave her a maintenance allowance as per her wishes. But because she did not like him, she said to the Prophet (PBUH), ‘I am afraid if I remain with him I may not be able to observe Allah’s hudood’. What an empowerment of women by Islam!

In this day and age, our patriarchal society, fiercely dominated by men of tribal/feudal values and customs, has deprived woman of all her Islamic rights. Horror of horrors, the flawed value system should even allow men to kill women in the name of family honour. Killing is the most un-Islamic practice, requiring that the killer be stringently punished. We must follow Islam, not tribal practices.

The writer is the head of the Institute of Islamic Studies and the Centre for Study of Society and Secularism, Mumbai.

Fetishistic security

WE spend far more effort defending our countries against specific movie-plot threats, rather than the real, broad threats. In the US during the months after the 9/11 attacks, we feared terrorists with scuba gear, terrorists with crop dusters and terrorists contaminating our milk supply. Both the UK and the US fear terrorists with small bottles of liquid. Our imaginations run wild with vivid specific threats. Before long, we’re envisioning an entire movie plot, without Bruce Willis saving the day. And we’re scared.

It’s not just terrorism; it’s any rare risk in the news. The big fear in Canada right now, following a particularly gruesome incident, is random decapitations on intercity buses. In the US, fears of school shootings are much greater than the actual risks. In the UK, it’s child predators. And people all over the world mistakenly fear flying more than driving.

But the very definition of news is something that hardly ever happens. If an incident is in the news, we shouldn’t worry about it. It’s when something is so common that it’s no longer news — car crashes, domestic violence — that we should worry. But that’s not the way people think.

Psychologically, this makes sense. We are a species of storytellers. We have good imaginations and we respond more emotionally to stories than to data. We also judge the probability of something by how easy it is to imagine, so stories that are in the news feel more probable — and ominous — than stories that are not. As a result, we overreact to the rare risks we hear stories about, and fear specific plots more than general threats.

The problem with building security around specific targets and tactics is that it’s only effective if we happen to guess the plot correctly. If we spend billions defending the Underground and terrorists bomb a school instead, we’ve wasted our money. If we focus on the World Cup and terrorists attack Wimbledon, we’ve wasted our money. It’s this fetish-like focus on tactics that results in the security follies at airports. We ban guns and knives, and terrorists use box-cutters. We take away box-cutters and corkscrews, so they put explosives in their shoes. We screen shoes, so they use liquids. We take away liquids, and they’re going to do something else. Or they’ll ignore airplanes entirely and attack a school, church, theatre, stadium, shopping mall, airport terminal outside the security area, or any of the other places where people pack together tightly.

These are stupid games, so let’s stop playing. Some high-profile targets deserve special attention and some tactics are worse than others. Airplanes are particularly important targets because they are national symbols and because a small bomb can kill everyone aboard. Seats of government are also symbolic, and therefore attractive, targets. But targets and tactics are interchangeable. The following three things are true about terrorism. One, the number of potential terrorist targets is infinite. Two, the odds of the terrorists going after any one target is zero. And three, the cost to the terrorist of switching targets is zero. We need to defend against the broad threat of terrorism, not against specific movie plots. Security is most effective when it doesn’t require us to guess. We need to focus resources on intelligence and investigation: identifying terrorists, cutting off their funding and stopping them regardless of what their plans are. We need to focus resources on emergency response: lessening the impact of a terrorist attack, regardless of what it is. And we need to face the geopolitical consequences of our foreign policy. In 2006, UK police arrested the liquid bombers not through diligent airport security, but through intelligence and investigation. It didn’t matter what the bombers’ target was. It didn’t matter what their tactic was. They would have been arrested regardless. That’s smart security. Now we confiscate liquids at airports, just in case another group happens to attack the exact same target in exactly the same way. That’s just illogical.

— The Guardian, London