Freedom and terror

PRESIDENT Pervez Musharraf has done well to re-emphasize to an international audience the link that exists between terrorism and what he called “unresolved political disputes.” Speaking in New York at a conference on the theme of ‘Fighting Terrorism for Humanity’, the president said terrorism stemmed from “hopelessness, frustration and desperation,” because the “demands for justice are brushed aside.” The tone and content of the speech should be appreciated against the background of the developments since 9/11 and the tendency in large sections of the western media to target not just Muslim militant groups but Islam itself. The president pointed out that most unresolved political disputes involved the Muslim world and referred specifically to Kashmir and Palestine, where under the contrived cover of fighting terrorism, legitimate freedom movements are being de-legitimized.

The frustration of the Muslim peoples is understandable, because, as the president pointed out, the right to self-determination has been granted in such places as Kashmir and Palestine by the UN. Yet the emphasis in the media and some intellectual circles in the West has been only to condemn militancy while ignoring the political part of the struggle. In both Palestine and Kashmir, the people have waged a straggle that was political in the beginning. It is only when the peaceful struggle for freedom did not bear fruit, the big powers remained indifferent, and the occupying powers increased the scale and intensity of their repression that the oppressed people resorted to armed struggle. Today in Kashmir and Palestine, the struggle for freedom is both political and military. Yet the western-controlled media totally ignores the political part of it and focuses on the armed aspect of the struggle, terming it terrorism. The media forgets that the resort to armed struggle became inevitable only after the occupation powers unleashed the might of the state’s coercive apparatus on the subjugated people — rightly called state terrorism. India and Israel empitomize this in their behaviour in Kashmir and Palestine.

Strangely, even the condemnation of armed struggle as terrorism is selective. We know, for instance — as emphasized by Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad some time back — that terrorism in its modern form was introduced into the Middle East by Zionist militias. All along, ever since Britain promulgated the infamous Balfour Declaration (1917), the Zionists used terror to create a phony immigrant majority in Palestine. The tactics they employed were to burn Arab villages and kill men, women and children to drive the Palestinians out of their ancestral land. After the establishment of Israel, Zionist terrorism has taken the form of state terrorism — as is evident from what is going on in the occupied territories today. Another fact to which the president referred is the need for defining terrorism. Is a freedom fighter who uses violence to liberate his country a terrorist? Must he be bracketed with those who resort to such acts of mass murder as crashing airliners into the World Trade Centre or bombing the Bali night club? Conversely, can states like India and Israel escape blame for spawning violence as a mode of political action by occupying other people’s lands, suppressing their wishes and using massive repression as a policy in violation of UN resolutions? The silence of most western governments and media on the killing and repression of the Muslim peoples has only served to widen the gulf between the West and Muslim peoples.

The president’s speech also condemns those Muslim groups which indulge in senseless acts of militancy and terror — acts which not only do not promote any worthwhile cause but serve to cast Islam and the Muslims in a bad light. One cannot but note here the important part which madrassahs have traditionally played in Muslim societies. Designed basically to produce imams well-versed in Islamic disciplines, madrassahs have proliferated in Pakistan. While some of them are still doing a commendable job by conforming to their traditional role as centres of Islamic learning, some others have fallen victim to those who have tried to use them for political purposes. Often, as street scenes in Pakistan have demonstrated, many politicized clerics have used madrassah students to make a show of their street power and political clout to the government and their political rivals. This has done enormous harm to Pakistan, injected politically-motivated militancy, spawned sectarian violence and tarnished the image of the madrassahs. The president correctly stressed that Muslims should abjure extremism and militancy and opt for enlightened modernism.

However, there are bound to be some reservations about his claim that Pakistan is poised for success in combating domestic terrorism. We have a long way to go yet. Bomb blasts and attacks on places of worship continue, while individuals fall victim to targeted killings motivated by sectarian considerations. While Islamabad is playing a key role as a front-line member of the US-led war on terror, it clearly needs to do much more before it can claim success in its efforts to fight internal terrorism.

Persistent indifference

THE proper and safe disposal of oil-soaked sand and debris collected from Karachi’s beaches in the aftermath of the Tasman Spirit oil spill has become a bone of contention between various government agencies. As part of the clean-up efforts following the spill, it was decided in August to move the debris to a location far away from the city. At the time it was agreed that the discarded material would not be used for any purpose and would be disposed of in pits specially prepared by the Sindh Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA). With the clean-up operation coming to an end, and most of the bags containing the contaminated soil having been moved to their pre-agreed location, it has now transpired that the pits have not been dug. Also, there have been no arrangements to prepare them according to the specifications agreed. The understanding was that SEPA would also line the pits with a special chemical so that they would not pose a health hazard. Residents at Chakro village, the designated landfill site, are now complaining of health related ailments as a result of the dumped soil in their vicinity. Instead of accepting blame and making amends, the Sindh environment secretary has added insult to injury by telling a reporter that he had ordered a stop to further collection of the contaminated sand as he believed it should be allowed to be washed away into the sea.

This is incredible, and further evidence of the indifference of the provincial bureaucracy in dealing with a situation that not only requires urgent attention but also some understanding of the nature of the disaster that the city is facing. It is obvious from the secretary’s statement that he has no idea about the technical aspects of this problem. This bureaucratic ignorance is further complicated by the wrangling going on between the various stakeholders who form part of a coordination committee set up under the chairmanship of the chief secretary to deal with the aftermath of the oil spill. None is willing to take full responsibility for what is assigned to them, and the coordination committee remains ineffective in penalizing the offending parties. From this sequence of events, it is obvious that little is being done despite all the loud noises made in various quarters in this regard to clean up the beaches in a proper and coordinated manner.