Status of woman in Islam

IT is a general belief, particularly in the West that in the eyes of Islam woman is inferior to man. This is due to their lack of access to the Quran and the Traditions. In fact, Islam is the only system which contains provisions that ensure absolute equality between man and woman.

However, the distinction between equality and similarity must be kept in mind. Man and woman have been created equal, not identical. In Islam, the rights and responsibilities of a woman are equal to those of a man, but they are not necessarily the same. Both have been fashioned differently from each other, so their roles are also different. The variation in their functions does not imply that one is inferior to the other.

According to Islam, man and woman can morally and spiritually rise to the same eminence. In the Quran we find good and righteous women being given the same position as good and righteous men. The highest favour which God has bestowed upon man is the gift of Divine Revelation. Along with men, women also received this honour:

“And when the angels said: O’Mary, Allah has chosen thee and purified thee and chosen thee above the women of the world.” (3:41) “When We revealed to thy mother what was revealed.” (20:38) “And We revealed to Moses’ mother...” (28:7) The Quran speaks of the great prophets of God, saying: “And mention Abraham in the Book.” (19:41) “And mention Moses in the Book.” (19:51) A woman is spoken of in exactly the same manner: “And mention Mary in the Book.” (19:61).

The Quran makes no difference between man and woman regarding the bestowal of reward for the good deed performed by him or her: “Whoever does good, whether male or female, and is a believer, We will certainly make him live a happy life, and We will certainly give them their reward for the best of what they did.” (16:97)

“Surely the men who submit and the women who submit; and the believing men and the believing women; and the obeying men and the obeying women; and the truthful men and the truthful women; and the patient men and the patient women; and the humble men and the humble women; and the charitable men and the charitable women; and the fasting men and the fasting women; and the men who guard their chastity and the women who guard their chastity; and the men who remember Allah and the women who remember Allah — Allah has prepared for them forgiveness and a mighty reward.” (33:35) Woman is equal to man in the pursuit of education and knowledge. Muhammad, the Messenger of God (peace be upon him) declared that it is incumbent on every Muslim male and female to seek knowledge.

Man and woman have been given equal right to inherit from the parents and the near relatives: “Men shall have a portion of what the parents and the near relatives leave, and women shall have a portion of what the parents and the near relatives leave...” (4:7)

A woman’s right to inherit is as much protected by the law as that of a man. If the deceased wishes to deprive her by making a will in favour of other relations or any other cause, the law will not allow it.

However, it must be remembered that whereas the right to inherit of both man and woman is equal, their shares in the inheritance may differ. In certain cases, a woman gets half of what a man in her position would get. The cause of this variation is the financial responsibilities and liabilities with which man has been burdened, not woman.

As compared to man, woman is financially secure and provided for under Islamic dispensation. If she is a wife, her husband is the provider; if she is a mother, it is the son; if she is a daughter, it is the father; if she is a sister, it is the brother; and so on. If she has no relations, then it is the responsibility of state to maintain her.

In no case she will be left helpless. Whereas, a man, except in one or two cases, is supposed to not only look after his family and other needy relations, but also to make financial contributions to good causes in society. Thus, a larger share in the inheritance does not depict the supremacy of man over woman, but it is rather a concession granted to him in lieu of his financial burden.

Islam has given man and woman equal rights to contract, to enterprise, and to earn and possess independently. The Quran says: “...For men is the benefit of what they earn. And for women is the benefit of what they earn. And ask Allah of His grace...” (4:32)

Man and woman are equally entitled to freedom of expression. Women not only expressed their opinion freely, but also argued and participated in serious discussions with the Prophet and other Muslim leaders. There were occasions when women expressed their views on legislative matters of public interest, and stood in opposition to the Caliphs, who then accepted the sound arguments of these women.

In the eyes of Islam, a woman’s life, property, and honour are as sacred as those of a man. If she commits an offence, her penalty is no less or more than a man’s in a similar case. If she is wronged or harmed, she gets due compensation, equal to what a man in her position would get.

Equality in civil and criminal liability can also be explained by the example of theft liable to Hadd. If the charge is proved, then the person, regardless of being a man or woman, is punished with amputation of limb: “And (as for) the man and the woman addicted to theft, cut off their hands as a punishment for what they have earned, an exemplary punishment from Allah. And Allah is Mighty, Wise.” (5:38).

Similarly, the punishment for adultery is also the same for man and woman: “the adulteress and the adulterer, flog each of them (with) a hundred stripes; and let not pity for them detain you from obedience to Allah, if you believe in Allah and the Last Day; and let a party of believers witness their chastisement.” (24:2)

The verdict of Islam on the inter se status of man and woman is the only complete, logical, and practical declaration pertaining to the matter. The approach of Islam towards defining the position of man and woman is unique, as it always handles the issue by making a distinction between equality and sameness.

Turkey’s week

THIS is shaping up to be a historic week for Turkey and the West. The European Union is to decide whether to open negotiations with Ankara on membership, a step that could fully integrate a Muslim nation of 80 million people into the community over the next decade or so.

Between now and the summit, U.N. negotiators are hoping to achieve a breakthrough in the 30-year-old conflict in Cyprus, a feat that will require Turkey’s new government to deliver crucial concessions by the Turkish administration in the northern half of the divided island.

Meanwhile, Turkey’s new leader, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, is in Washington, where he will be pressed by President Bush to accept the staging of both American warplanes and American troops in Turkey if there is war with Iraq. By week’s end the bonds between Turkey and the West could have been decisively strengthened — or critically weakened.

Anyone with an interest in overcoming the present gulf between the developed democracies and the Islamic world must hope for the first outcome. That — and not just the desire for Ankara’s military cooperation — explains why the Bush administration is pressing the European Union so hard on Turkey’s membership.

The point is not just to ensure Turkey’s economic stability; the real benefit of EU membership, or even negotiations for it, will be the requirement that Turkey fully liberalize its political system and end its discrimination against minorities and abuses of human rights.

The result would be not just the consolidation of modern democracy in a strategically located country, but also the creation of a model for the neighbouring states of the Middle East and Central Asia.

Many European politicians say the challenges and costs of accepting Turkey would be overwhelming — a stance that frequently is a cover for aversion to granting the same privileges to relatively poor Muslims, as will likely be given this week to the disadvantaged but mostly Christian people of 10 new member countries, mostly in former Communist Europe.

But while the political windfall from opening talks with Turkey would be immediate, actual membership, and its economic costs, would not come for many years.

That leaves plenty of time to overcome the genuine hurdles to integrating Turkey with the European market _ as well as time for European politicians to educate their publics about the imperative of accepting religious and ethnic diversity in their continental superstate.

While the Bush administration is right to cheer on this process, it must prove itself willing to shoulder some of the burden of the country’s modernization. U.S. aid should be directed at projects that help build democratic institutions as well as military bases. Even as he advocates for Turkey with Brussels, Mr. Bush should press Mr. Erdogan to follow through on his political promises and accept the U.N. settlement on Cyprus.

Finally, the Pentagon’s zeal to nail down bases in Turkey should not lead the administration to promise Ankara undue influence over postwar Iraq. Part of promoting Turkey’s European integration must be pressing its government to observe, sooner rather than later, the democratic norms that for the United States are the point of the process.—-The Washington Post

A new dawn for MQM

LET it be granted straightaway that throughout its career the MQM (to begin with Mohajir and now Muttahida) has been systematically mistreated by political parties in power. Each time the MQM was taken on board, it was only to be taken for a ride and then wounded and abandoned in the wilderness.

The most glaring case of such unprovoked betrayal was during the ‘operation clean-up,’ mounted by COAS Asif Nawaz during Nawaz Sharif’s first administration.

Let it also be granted that the MQM began as a force representing a section of the Pakistani people that possess some positive points. They are people drawn from the middle, the middle-middle and the lower-middle classes of mostly urban people. A large majority of them are educated, some of them highly accomplished. Almost the whole lot of them are working class people, whether at the top or at the bottom.

Now take a critical but unbiased look at the complexion of the political parties that occupy centre stage even after 55 years of independence. All except a few of them are, unlike the MQM human material, drawn from the rich land-owning class. Many of them are absentee landlords with politics as their pastime, hobby or ancestral privilege.

The other powerful section among the ruling elite happens to comprise the ‘first-generation billionaires.’ They have come to have their amateur hands on the levers of state power, mostly through the power of money. Their billions may not stand scrutiny. But placed as they are on dizzy heights, now they are also above the reach of law.

The personages that have come to be icons in Pakistan politics have had no inhibitions about shifting their loyalties. Indeed the term ‘loyalty,’ be it to principle or person, is alien to Pakistan’s upper class political ethos. Looking at this prospect Allama Iqbal would be saying, “Mera nahien banta na ban, apna tuo ban...” If you cannot be mine, be at least your own

Are many in the party that is now inheriting power conscious of the fact that this power was in their hands until yesterday as the ‘yes’ people of Nawaz Sharif whom they have so blithely abandoned? But it hardly lies in the mouth of Nawaz Sharif to complain about shifting loyalties. Once he was the proclaimed protege of dictator Ziaul Haq. Then he converted a standard-bearer of pure, undiluted democracy. Nothing short of it.

Also prominent in today’s parade are some of the most staunch camp followers of dictator Zia. Later, the same pack swore allegiance to Zia’s favourite political heir, Nawaz Sharif. Now the same gentlemen are on a different bandwagon that is flying another flag. For some of these star players this is at least the third change of faith. Among them you see the wizard whom Dictator Zia cheerfully described as his ‘Opening Batsman.’ He is now opening for another team.

There is so much more that can be said for the political ethos of those who have been wielding power throughout our 55 years. Among the rulers, military brass has enjoyed the lion’s share. Ayub Khan had his cabinet declare him field marshal. Perhaps the only field martial in military history who had never seen action. Among his gifts, the first was distortion of democracy into ‘Basic Democracy.’ He also midwifed at the birth of “Twenty-two Families” of quick-fire billionaires. They are now 400, if not more.

Most of these billionaires, in tandem with the gentry, have the means to call the tune, political as well as financial. In Pakistan political power is soon translated into money power and money power into political power. Now we have reached a point where those in power have lots of money and those with bags of money have political power. Money makes the mare go. Imagine where the mares can rule the roost.

In this kind of ambience the political party that stood for those who neither have land nor the kind of money that makes the mare go, was not of a piece with the ruling elite. The born rulers spurned the MQM presence in their company. The MQM did not comprise the stuff rulers are made of. It spoke a language the ruling class did not understand. And when the rulers did understand they found it just too incendiary to be tolerated.

Added to this incongruity, was the MQM’s own errors, some of them unforgivable by any decent standards. Its attitudes were all too often adolescent, amateurish, temperamental and needlessly provocative. Some of this could be forgiven and reformed had the senior politicians shown some tolerance. Most of the time the rulers found it infra dig to rub shoulders with the MQM. Its ideas that were incongruent with the culture of the rulers.

There is no point in going on and on with this litany because it is now counterproductive. As far as one can see, the country stands at a point where the new dispensation may once again bring the MQM into play. This is a new chapter opening for the MQM and its senior and more experienced partners in the new pattern of power. The question that most people must be asking is simple: Would the MQM make good this time? The answer, too, can be equally simple. Yes, it is wiser after having gone through so much of adversity. Adversity, they say, is a good teacher.

It took the MQM leadership a lot of beating before it realized its congenital flaw. It began its journey with a flawed name. Now it has corrected that error. What remains to be seen is whether or not it has expiated enough for that ‘original sin.’ Whether within power-wielding elite or out in the opposition, the MQM must strive to demonstrate that the change that has come over it is more than merely in name. MQM leaders and workers out in the field have to behave as qualitatively more than ‘Mohajir’ and genuinely answering to the name: Muttahida. It has to return to work with a new vision and broader horizon in front of it.

Any attempt to settle old scores would be an invitation of disaster. Indeed suicide. As of now, and from now onward, past is not only another country but a land that has been eliminated by the waves of time. The MQM field workers may have done much for the party. There is no denying, however, that some wayward elements have brought bad name to the party. Now is the time for the senior leaders of this still very youthful party to make due, visible and tangible amends. If it is offered a share in power, it must also carry concomitant measure of responsibility.

It should be realized by all concerned, from the president, prime minister down to administrative functionaries that, in order to be compatible with the ground reality, style and speed of governance in Sindh and Karachi has to be more than slightly different from what it should be in other provinces. With Karachi as its capital, Sindh becomes the province where wealth is produced in the 21st century style.

Karachi is not only the largest industrial and financial centre, it is also the gateway to the world. It is here that Pakistan and the world are in hand-shaking proximity. It has to breathe in a modern, indeed ultra modern atmosphere and react in the fashion that is universally accepted. From Karachi the message should go out that any talk of changing the weekend from Sunday to Friday would be a gravely erroneous and retrograde step. It will present Pakistan as ‘fundamentalist’ and hence to be ostracized by world community.

Sindh, with Karachi as its flag-carrier, should wake up and shake off those tendencies that are so manifestly primitive. The MMA talks in such self-righteous tones. What has the MMA to say on Karo Kari? Does their Islam countenance this inhuman system and practice? Where do the MMA stand vis-a-vis such hideous relics of a past that ought to have been buried a long time ago.

Among the top priorities of the new government in Sindh should be putting an end to the urban-rural distinction. This cannot be wished away. All people of goodwill — there is no dearth of them — should put their heads together and devise a mellow-tone strategy to erase this line. Mind you, it would still take quite some doing by the best of available wisdom and the best of will on all sides.

Bush’s Iraq obsession & Carter’s advice

THE discovery of a consignment of certain components of Scud missiles from a North Korean vessel on Monday has led to speculation by some western news agencies that it could have been destined for Iraq — although Yemen claimed that it had bought the consignment for its own defence. The consignment was confiscated although there was no evidence to substantiate the speculation.

Before the consignment was restored to Yemen, a move was already afoot to exploit the discovery to heighten the war hysteria against Iraq, which has been building up in the past few months at the behest of the US and some of its European allies. There has also been a strong military build-up in the area to punish Iraq for what the US regards as its clandestine attempt at developing an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

A team of some 60 weapons inspectors from the UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) is already in Iraq to inspect sites where Iraq is believed to be manufacturing or stock-piling WMDs. The team will comprise some 300 inspectors by early next year. The inspectors have been investigating hundreds of suspected sites, including the presidential palace in Baghdad. As required under the relevant UN Security Council resolution (1441), Baghdad has already provided a full statement, running into about 12,000 pages, on its suspected weapons sites, assets and materials.

US President George Bush has threatened to declare war against Iraq if the latter attempts to any information concerning its nuclear weapons programme. With American and British warplanes carrying out frequent air strikes at targets in the north and south of Iraq on the pretext of implementing the ‘no-fly zones’ restrictions which were imposed by the UN after the 1991 Gulf War, a formal declaration of war will only enlarge the scope and scale of the offensives against Iraq which in any case have been going on for long.

It is obvious that President Bush is obsessed with what he regards as Iraq’s WMD programme. He does not miss any opportunity to suggest that Iraq is already guilty of violation of UNSC resolution 1441 placing an embargo on Iraq’s nuclear assets. He has convinced himself — and some of his allies, particularly Britain — that military action against Iraq should no longer be delayed.

President Bush has refused to pay any heed to the scores of anti-war rallies which have already been held in the US and parts of Europe. On Tuesday about 100 American film and other celebrities signed an anti-war letter for the attention of the Bush administration. However, there is no indication that the US pressure for war against Iraq is likely to ease. On the other hand, a US logistics unit is engaged in a round-the-clock exercise in the Kuwaiti desert barely 13 kilometers from the Iraqi border. Also, US forces have kicked off a computer exercise in Doha to test the capabilities of a forward command centre.

So the stage for a war against Iraq has thus been firmly set. What is more, the US appears determined to go to war unilaterally even if it does not have a specific UN mandate to do so.

However, saner elements have not given up hope and are trying to exercise some restraint on Washington. Contrary to the position adopted by the British prime minister, Tony Blair, the British secretary for international development, Clare Short, said on Monday that she was hopeful that there could be a peaceful settlement after Iraq had handed over its 12,000-page statement of nuclear assets to the weapons inspectors. She had at one stage threatened to quit Mr Blair’s cabinet “if there were a war against Iraq.”

The US deputy secretary of state, Richard Armitage, has been on a visit to Tokyo to hold talks with the Japanese premier to seek Japan’s support for the US stand on Iraq (and North Korea).” However, he maintains that he has been careful not to paint a “war scenario” during his meeting with Premier Junichiro Koizumi. In any case. Japan’s role in a possible war against Iraq will be basically non-military as the Japanese constitution does not permit the use of force for settling international disputes. Mr Armitage’s overtures are said to have provoked strong resistance from some Japanese opposition leaders.

In an attempt to sideline the UN, Washington is said to have secured a complete copy of Iraq’s declaration of its nuclear assets. Reports say that the US would provide the other four permanent members of the UN Security Council with copies of the document. This has brought an angry reaction from the ten non-permanent members of the Council.

In any case, Gen Amer Al Saadi, a close aide of President Saddam Hussein, has made it quite clear that Iraq has put a stop to its programme for chemical and biological weapons and has challenged the US administration to come up with whatever evidence they might have to the contrary. The Iraqi foreign ministry has also expressed the apprehension that the US could be “manipulating” the statement provided to the nuclear weapons inspectors. In any case, Washington appears to have preempted the United Nations by taking it upon itself to make copies of the “mountain” of papers and CD-Roms provided by Iraq and make them available to the Security Council’s permanent members. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan seems to have no advance information about it. The procedure to circumvent the UN has apparently been adopted by the current Colombian President of the Council who may come under pressure to toe the US line after the Secretary of State Colin Powell’s meeting with certain Colombian diplomats to secure their cooperation. The UNSC president acknowledged that he had made a “political decision” to accede to Washington’s “plan” — a development which has evoked protests from the Council’s non-permanent members, notably Syria.

However, the US appears determined to ride rough shod over the sensitivities of the Arab and Middle Eastern members of the UNSC. Fears have been expressed that Washington could make selective use of the information contained in the Iraqi report and leak it out selectively to the countries not particularly well disposed towards Iraq and create a hostile environment around it. This could be of help to the Americans if and when they decide to move against Iraq. Countries that may have been named in the Iraqi report as “suppliers” of sensitive material to promote Iraq’s alleged nuclear weapons development programme will have a genuine reason to apprehend that the US may turn on them after disposing of Saddam Hussein.

It is clear that after the breakdown of the bipolar world order with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US enjoys complete freedom to play around with the destinies of the nations which do not happen to be among its camp followers. However, this is a dangerous game to play, with possible consequences for the entire western world that may not be easy to fathom at the moment.

President Bush would do well to pay heed to President Carter’s counsel of sanity contained in his speech at the award of the Nobel Peace Prize for him the other day. There could not have been a more timely warning to Mr Bush than Jimmy Carter’s words of caution, urging him to realize the risks inherent in his doctrine of a preemtion, marginalizing the UN’s role in the Iraq crisis. There is more than a grain of wisdom in Jimmy Carter’s declaration: for powerful countries to adopt a principle of preventive war may well set an example that can have catastrophic consequences.

Nibbling at a new theory

SO now we know why we like cheese so much. It’s our mouse genes. An impressive international team of scientists has mapped the mouse genome, the complex collection, arrangement and bonding of some 30,000 genes.

As life’s biological building blocks, genes programme mice — indeed, all living things from bacteria to biologists — to think, look, act and dress as they do. The scientists, who carry the white-lab-coat gene and often eat cheese, explain in their Nature article that humans and mice have a lot more in common than thought. Ninety-nine percent of mouse and human genes are the same.

Of course, we’ve long suspected an invisible human bond with little mice. Rats are dirty, deserving of disgust or life as lab test subjects, drinking immense amounts of colas and wine. But mice are different. Except for Orkin staffers, humans often appear halfhearted in hunting mice; mousetraps catch more fingers than the minuscule rodents.

You know all the mouse cartoons and stories, right? Well, who’d you cheer for _ Tom or Jerry? Mighty Mouse? He’s a hero. Mickey Mouse? We built him a theme park. Stuart Little got adopted. Mice just seem more like us. Now, we know why.

Mice come inside when it’s cold. They sneak snacks late at night and dislike loud teen music.

Also, Mickey and Minnie aside, few mice don hats. Have you noticed fewer humans, especially women, wearing hats recently? See any connection? Or polyester leisure suits. Neither species likes them anymore. Now, at this month’s holiday parties watch how cheese is served _ in little cubes, just right for both species.

These scientific findings also prompt wonder about whether humans are unique in their study of other species. We know from recent reports that wild dogs evolved into domesticated pets by studying what animal behaviour evoked beneficial treatment from humans. — Los Angeles Times