 |
| |
|
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
|
|
US policies and war against terrorism Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema
The POST, Sun, August,27, 2006 .
Despite Pakistan ’s massive efforts and its acknowledged successes to curb terrorism, the western media appears to be obsessed to link all acts of terrorism with Pakistan in one form or the other. The western media‘s negative projection of recent discovery of a plot aimed to blow transatlantic flights with the crucial help of Pakistan is a good example of biased and twisted reporting. Almost all the major network opted to use phrases like Pakistan linked, Pakistan origin, British of Pakistani ancestry, British born Pakistanis. Although leaders like Bush and Blair acknowledged Pakistani contributions, but the media in their countries largely seemed to have opted to underplay it or project the development in such way that it denies the deserving credit to Pakistan .
Such biased attitudes do not help. On the contrary it further complicates the situations and tends to generate wrong and undesired vibes. Many hardliners in target countries employ such reporting for supporting their arguments about western determination to vilify the Muslim world. For obvious reason they thrive on ignorance and easily make inroads using western devised images of the Muslims. To further strengthen their arguments they use ignominious treatment accorded at Abu Gharib and Guantanamo Bay prisons.
It appears that US and its close allies are still far from being effective in their approaches to adequately and satisfactorily deal with the menace of terrorism. A recent report by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) once again trying to lead the American decision makers on relatively less significant path and completely ignoring what can result in successes in war against terrorism. The CRS is highlighting that American support to regimes in Pakistan , Egypt , Saudi Arabia , Indonesia , Russia and Jordan is allowing terrorist groups to win sympathies of the people.
Like the western media such reports from think tanks and research organizations are not really helping at all. After all the US history is filled with examples of support extended to authoritarian regimes of their own choice since the end of the Second World War which was justified by the media and research organizations on the grounds that it appropriately fitted into its global strategy against the perceived expansion of Communism during the entire period of the Cold War.
On the contrary such reports often influence and manage to put many ill informed legislators on a wrong path. Focusing on the likely emergence of groups that may sympathize with the terrorists and even support their activities is also going to shift their attentions from the real issues involved. The report also mentioned that Pakistan , Indonesia and Malaysia among countries where radical Islamic groups are joining the political process. In this connection Hamas’s and Hizbullah achievements are mentioned in order to strengthen the argument advanced in the report. Doesn’t it seem strange that on one hand they are engaged in promoting democratic ideals yet on the other they appear to be critical of specific groups joining the political processes?
As stated above such arguments invariably shift the focus from the real issue and indirectly contribute towards the perpetuation of real issue. Among the many causes that have given birth to terrorism and sustaining its perpetuation perhaps the most important and indeed the major cause is injustice perpetrated against an individual, or a group or a state. On the other hand a state, an organized group and an individual could also commit acts of terrorism. Many people feel that varied forms of injustice committed in Kashmir , Palestine , Iraq , Afghanistan , Russia , and Lebanon is promoting and fanning terrorism rather effectively. Apart from the Chechenian struggle against the Russia , in almost all other cases the American are either directly or indirectly involved.
Undoubtedly the real issues revolve around the ongoing age old Kashmir and Palestine disputes along with the invasions of Afghanistan , Iraq and Lebanon . Undoubtedly the judicious resolutions of these disputes and could pull the rug under the feet of probable terrorists. To make things more complex many westerns promoted the war against terrorism as a war against Islam and Islamic world. The western media still continues to project Islam as a religion of violence despite the concerted efforts of many Islamic scholars, both in the western world as well as in Islamic countries, to clarify inadvertent misgivings and misinterpretations. It appears that there are many in the west that is not very comfortable with a respectable and the deserving image of Islam.
Deliberately contrived misinterpretation of Islamic concept of Jihad has further provided fuel. Islam is a peaceful religion. It strictly prohibits the killing of innocents. Its projected radicalization in some countries is the product of carefully contrived policies of certain individuals and in some cases of some countries policy pursuits. Jihad merely implies fight against injustice. Again the rise and increased popularity of certain radical groups is the product of unjust policy pursuits of certain countries.
In many ways the incumbent international political system which is based on nation state system along with the notion of national interests could be construed as a contributing factor. Admittedly if one judges American policies objectively in the above mentioned cases ( Kashmir , Palestine , Afghanistan , Iraq , Lebanon ), a large portion of blame has to be shared by the Americans. For instance American and Indian strategic partnership has effectively colored American vision of a judicious resolution of the Kashmir dispute just as it had already done with regard to the plight of the Palestinians. It buys without question all Indian interpretations of the dispute.
While projecting itself as the champion of human rights all over the world, it does not bother about the Kashmiri rights. Similarly being heavily influenced by the Jewish lobbies and regarding Israel as its outpost, it does not care about the Palestinians’ rights. The killing of so many civilians in Lebanon in the recent Israel invasion and the role played in preventing an early ceasefire clearly reflects the unjust policy pursuits. What is happening in Iraq or Afghanistan do not augur well for future either. Not much pressure has been exerted by the Americans in order to convince the Russian to judiciously seek the resolution of Chechenian issue.
The US policies may seem justified under the pretext of what is called the ‘dictates of national interests’. What the American need to comprehend is that they should focus more and make concerted efforts to resolve those disputes. Both Kashmir and Palestine issue can be resolved with a little bit of concerted US efforts. Once these are judiciously resolved, the breeding grounds for terrorism would radically shrink. If a Palestine state is established and the Kashmiri exercise their right of self determination as was promised to them by the UN resolutions, there is no doubt in my mind that it would have electrifying impact.
Focusing on imposing a desired system and undertaking regime change is unlikely to check the march of terrorism. All disputes could be resolved through negotiations if the intentions are honest and desire for a peaceful world is genuine. If policies are going to be unjust and self interest orientated in order to retain domestic, regional and global support, the elimination of terrorism would continue to remain an illusive commodity.
The writer works for Islamabad Policy Research Institute.
North Korea ’s Nuclear Test Challenge to Peace on the Korean Peninsula
The KyungHyang Shinmun
A consequential incident has finally taken place. In defiance of the desperate hope many people had that its forewarning of a nuclear test would prove to be a bargaining chip in future diplomatic negotiations, North Korea has irrevocably carried out the explosion of a nuclear bomb. The test is an act that upsets not only the global regime of the (nuclear) Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) but also the security environments of the Korean peninsular and the Northeast Asia region. First of all, tension on the Korean peninsula cannot help escalating.
The test would eventually strengthen the military alliance between the United States and Japan , against which China would accelerate the modernization of its military power. Also evident is the growing possibility that voices in favor of possessing nuclear arms would gain forces in Japan , Taiwan and even in South Korea . Thus, North Korea has opened Pandora’s box that should never be unclosed.
North Korea ’s venture as such is an act of treachery against South Korea , which has made efforts for a common prosperity of the two Koreas in spite of skepticism in the international society in light of the North’s missile and nuclear development programs and poor records of human rights. As Pyongyang must be well aware of, the Seoul government has promoted tourism to Mount Geumgang and the Gaeseung industrial park project in the North in the face of Washington ’s stiff opposition. The South also opted for abstention whenever the North’s human rights problems were debated at the United Nations Commission for Human Rights, because it attached the utmost priority to peace and common prosperity on the Korean peninsula.
Nonetheless, Seoul ’s these efforts have now been betrayed and, what’s more, the South suffers a direct hit at its economy and national security. As sufferers of the treachery, we cannot but to condemn the North’s nuclear test. There is not a single person who agrees to Pyongyang’s absurd claim of late that South Korea owes much to the “military first” policy of the North.
In truth, North Korea itself is a victim of the nuclear game. In announcing the nuclear test, Pyongyang claimed the test was a “historic event as it greatly encouraged and pleased the military and people who have wished to have powerful self-reliant defense capability.” However, the North has scored little gains in actuality, as its people are stricken by a yet worse destitution and greater unease about their security.
North Korea ’s distress can easily be supposed by recalling the bitter experiences both India and Pakistan sustained in the wake of their respective nuclear tests in 1998. Peoples of the two countries suffered economic difficulties due to sanctions imposed by the U.N. Security Council. Pakistan , that was a closed society like North Korea , was especially hit hard by the economic sanctions until 2001 when it joined the U.S.-led war against terrorism and began to obtain outside aid.
The possession of nuclear weapons does not necessarily assure the security of a state. Isn’t Israel , a virtual nuclear power, still situated in an uneasy security environment? A nuclear test may help the North to maintain its existing system, but its effect will only be transitory. Although some observers analyzed that Pyongyang should have pushed the test through to gain a determinant leverage in future diplomatic negotiations, one can hardly find a country that has succeeded in boosting its bargaining power only with the acquisition of an atomic bomb.
Now that Pyongyang carried out the test, the ball has been tossed into the court of the international society. The U.N. Security Council is set to begin its debate on measures to censure North Korea . But then, to make the sanctions effectively workable, the purpose must be defined clear and measures rational. Of course, the purpose should be indisputably directed to have the North abandon its nuclear weapons and return to the NPT regime. At issue are measures to be taken. Though some quarters refer to military options, there are no precedents of such tough actions. No military steps were taken when China as a latecomer conducted nuclear tests in 1964 and India and Pakistan in 1998, because military actions taken against a potential nuclear power would bring about disastrous consequences.
In this regard, the only realistic option left for the international society is to apply economic pressures on North Korea , leading it to dismantle nuclear arms by itself and return to the world community as a faithful member. Worrisome are hawkish arguments made by hard-liners, however limited, in the United States and Japan in support of taking military countermeasures.
[Editor’s Note: The U.N. Security Council unanimously adopted on Oct. 15 a resolution to impose strict yet non-military sanctions on North Korea for its nuclear test conducted six days earlier. Pyongyang immediately rejected the resolution, saying that it would consider sustained U.S. pressures as a declaration of war and take “physical countermeasures,” while Seoul welcomed the U.N. action with a pledge to support it.
North Korea ’s nuclear test has made it inevitable for the South to make changes in its engagement policies toward the North. Thus far, Seoul has been practically out of a step with many other countries of the world in the debate of the North’s nuclear development program. However, the situation has now changed that we have to closely keep steps with the United States and China , let alone the U.N. Security Council, in launching an international drive to press the North to voluntarily give up its nuclear devices.
The first reason for the change is that the international community must make unified calls in unison to increase the possibility of prompting North Korea ’s move to abandon its disputed nuclear program. The second reason stems from our fateful situation. Unlike other nations, aren’t we burdened with the critical task to avert the tragedy of another fratricidal war as well as a catastrophic economic devastation? By positively taking part in the international debate on sanctions against North Korea and thus boosting our say on relevant issues, we can better prepare ourselves to meet an emergency situation.
Though not necessarily making up an imminent issue, one cannot totally rule out the probability that the international society may adopt an extreme measure such as a military option against the North. Especially in case that the diplomatic intricacy involving Iran’s nuclear issue remains stalled far too long without a sign of settlement, sparks may shoot up to bring about an unexpected development in this part of the world. With North Korea ’s nuclear test, we have come to shoulder grossly complex and difficult burdens. That is, we have to forestall, at the least, the adversity of facing a worst situation that involves military clashes on the Korean peninsula, resulting from a military option.
This is the reason why the government must be decisive yet cool-headed in taking countermeasures against the unprecedented development triggered off by the North’s nuclear explosion. In that process, the government needs to create a national consensus among the people and political parties as well, which is essential in overcoming the critical situation.
[Courtesy: The KyungHyang Shinmun, Oct. 9, 2006 , Korea Focuse Magazine, Embassy of ROK]
Working for Change
Many people benefit from their work in politics and society. With unshakeable idealism, commitment and confidence they are aiming to make the world a better, more peaceful and safer place.
Tom Koenigs
UN Special Representative in Afghanistan
Tom Koenigs, 62, business administrator, entered politics via the student movement. He made a name for himself as a budgetary expert in the Green Party. Mr. Koenigs was sent by the UN as civil administrator to Kosovo and as special representative to Guatemala . In 2005 he was appointed as German Federal Government Commissioner for Human Rights before being designated head of the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan in February 2006.
In mid-August Tom Koenigs ceremonially cut a red ribbon to mark the opening of the new UNAMA regional office in Qalat, southern Afghanistan . “We believe that our presence in the field can make a valuable contribution towards the country’s stability,” says the United Nation’s special representative for Afghanistan . More UNAMA offices are planned to create a better network in the country. In this way, Mr. Koenigs hopes to create closer links with the people and their needs, and so improve the possibilities of helping in the difficult task of rebuilding the country. One of the key tasks facing Mr. Koenigs as head of the UN mission in Kabul is to support the development of Afghanistan together with its state agencies and NGOs and to accompany the development and extension of constitutional structures. When UN Secretary General Kofi Annan appointed Mr. Koenigs in February 2006, he chose a man with international experience and a man who is particularly interested in human rights. He is responsible for all of the United Nations’ activities in the country and heads a team of 800 Afghan and 250 international colleagues. No easy assignment in a country devastated by the reign of the Taliban and war. Mr. Koenigs’ work is benefited by the experiences he already gained as a UN representative in Kosovo and Guatemala . But he says Afghanistan is a major challenge. The security situation is far more problematic: “Democracy is the goal, but we haven’t made it into the home stretch yet,” he said recently during a much regarded interview with Der Spiegel magazine. The most important thing in the world’s fifth poorest country is to provide young people with prospects for the future – especially through education. “If we want to curb the flow of recruits to radical Islamism, we have to build schools and provide opportunities without teaching fundamentalist ideas.”
His Highness the Aga Khan
Imam of the Ismailis
 Karim Aga Khan IV, 69, is the spiritual leader of more than 20 million Ismaili Muslims living mainly in Asia and Africa . The Aga Khan channels his money into the Aga Khan Development Network (AKDN), which he founded, for social projects with the main emphasis on education, health, job creation and women’s equality. His investments do not only benefit his followers, but entire regions.
The Aga Khan is a citizen of the world: the British prince was born in Switzerland , grew up in Kenya , studied at Harvard and now lives near Paris . The Aga Khan Development Network (AKDN), which he founded, is the largest private organization for development assistance and is active in over 30 countries. The Aga Khan provides 230 million dollars for projects – every year. He was responsible for building the largest power plant in the Sahel region; he has just founded a first university in three different Central Asian countries. In Africa he is building schools and colleges – he sees education as the only path to true democracy – as well as providing help with hospitals and offering microcredits to women. In 2006 the Aga Khan received the distinguished Tolerance Award of the Evangelical Academy of Tutzing for this development work and his services towards reconciliation between the Islamic world and the West. In his address at the presentation ceremony, Germany ’s Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier praised the “great friend of humanity and courageous visionary”. In his acceptance speech the Aga Khan referred to the fear of tyrants, of nature, of violence, of impoverishment and of ill health as a “source of intolerance”. He said that the replacement of fear by hope is probably the single most powerful trampoline of progress – when that happens even the most bitter conflicts can be resolved.
Barbara Ischinger
OECD Director for Education
 The career of Professor Barbara Ischinger, 57, has been constantly accompanied by the themes of education and exchange. She was a UNESCO director, director for academic exchanges with the Fulbright Commission and, most recently, the vice president of Humboldt University in Berlin responsible for international relations. She is a specialist in African Studies and has been OECD Director for Education since January 2006.
Sitting in a plane browsing through the job adverts she saw that the OECD was looking for a director for education. She promptly ordered a glass of champagne and said to herself: “I want that job.” Barbara Ischinger got it. It’s as if it were made-to-measure for this woman who has a wealth of theoretical and practical experience in the vast field of education – and has always lived, worked and researched in an intermediary world. The OECD in Paris , in which 30 countries work together, sees itself as a think tank, produces analyses and recommends solutions to political decision-makers. The educational directorate, which was founded in 2002, regularly hits the headlines with the PISA Studies on the quality of school education and inspires changes in the educational systems of numerous countries. “ PISA is our big hit,” says the OECD director. “Twenty-nine countries that don’t even belong to the OECD are taking part in the current study.” But Barbara Ischinger’s task consists of far more than this: the themes range from early learning to lifelong learning. Making international comparisons to discover who is blazing the best trails in education is a fascinating field of work. One area that is of special importance to Barbara Ischinger is the question: how migrant children can be better integrated. “Our main goal is to achieve social cohesion through education,” she says.
Joachim Rücker
UN Special Representative in Kosovo
 Dr. Joachim Rücker, 55, has been with Germany ’s Federal Foreign Office since 1979. He interrupted his diplomatic career for eight years to act as mayor of the city of Sindelfingen . His activities in the Balkans included work as deputy special representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina and as head of the UNMIK economic reconstruction agency in Kosovo before he was appointed head of the UNMIK mission in Kosovo in September 2006.
They say he’s a man for tough challenges. That’s probably why Joachim Rücker likes to quote his favourite Willy Brandt adage: “You have to aim for the impossible if you want to achieve the possible.” In September the economist and political scientist took up the responsible post as head of the UN mission UNMIK in Kosovo. His task is to continue preparing the province for autonomy whilst it is still under the transitional administration of the United Nations. Rücker will most likely be the last UN administrator there. The intricately difficult talks are currently taking place to finalize the definitive status of Kosovo. Rücker approaches his often delicate task with an air of pragmatic optimism. His characteristic style is well-known from his time as mayor in Sindelfingen , where the Social Democrat settled the city’s financial crisis with a thorough shake-up and fresh ideas. He simply enjoys “making things move”. Rücker is very well acquainted with the situation in the province that is inhabited by Albanians and Serbs: he has been in charge of economic reconstruction there for 18 months and has been very successful in promoting privatization. “When I started here some people reckoned that trying to get Kosovo’s economy back on its feet was a ‘mission impossible’. But none of it proved true.”
Monika Harms
Chief Federal Prosecutor
 Monika Harms, 60, was born in Berlin and grew up in Frankfurt am Main. After studying law she worked as a public prosecutor and later as a judge in Hamburg . In 1987 she moved to the Federal High Court, Germany ’s highest appellate court in civil and criminal proceedings. In 1999 she became head of the 5th Criminal Division in Leipzig . In June 2006 Monika Harms became Germany ’s attorney general at the Federal High Court in Karlsruhe .
She is a woman who likes plain-talking: when she was a judge she already found ways of expressing her opinion in no uncertain terms – for instance, on tax evasion. Now, in her new position, she will have an even greater opportunity to express herself unequivocally on tricky topics. In June 2006 Monika Harms became Germany ’s highest ranking prosecutor. Previously a judge at the Federal High Court, she is the first woman to be elected Chief Federal Prosecutor in the history of the Federal High Court. She now heads an administrative body with some 600 members of staff including 90 public prosecutors. Her most important tasks include the prosecution of offences against internal and external security – for instance, the combating of terrorism, right-wing extremism or industrial espionage. Monika Harms always wanted to be a public prosecutor. As a schoolgirl she followed the Auschwitz trial in Frankfurt , and ever since then her desire to dedicate herself to criminal law has grown. She once revealed in an interview that she enjoys being a “lone fighter”. That’s not a bad thing. An expert in commercial law, she has decisively demonstrated her total lack of interest in wheeling and dealing or intrigues behind closed doors. That’s hardly surprising for a woman with a passion for her particular profession.
Christian Schwarz-Schilling
High Representative
 Dr. Christian Schwarz-Schilling, 75, entrepreneur and CDU politician, was German post and telecommunications minister from 1982 to 1992. He resigned from office as a protest against Europe ’s inaction during the war in Bosnia . From 1995 to 2005 he mediated in Bosnia-Herzegovina as international arbitrator. Since February 2006 he has been high representative for Bosnia-Herzegovina and the EU’s special representative in Bosnia .
Since February 2006 Christian Schwarz-Schilling has in effect exercised part of Bosnia and Herzegovina ’s executive power as high representative of the international community – an office that carries great responsibility in a country marked by civil war. Accordingly, the former German federal minister has all the powers to ensure observance of the Dayton peace treaty, which means he can dismiss ministers and enact laws. “I have endeavoured, however, to make fewer interventions,” says Christian Schwarz-Schilling. There are good reasons for this: he assumed his mandate in a decisive year, because currently preparations are being made to enable the authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina to work under their own responsibility from 30 June 2007 . “I believe that it would be very unfair to close the high representative’s office and to present the politicians and those in charge of Bosnia and Herzegovina ’s institutions with a situation in which they are meant to assume responsibility at a stroke. It is crucial that a learning process is set in motion.” Schwarz-Schilling is supporting this process that also includes the restructuring of the socialist planned economy into a market economy and the transformation to a constitutional state based upon the rule of law in which the harmonious coexistence of multiethnic and multireligious forms of civil society must be guaranteed. What are the deeper roots of this commitment to the region for which he ultimately gave up ministerial office in the German government? “Previously, I had never had any connection with the Balkan countries. I had never visited Yugoslavia before 1992, not even on holiday. My commitment is based on what I experienced personally during the Second World War,” answers Schwarz-Schilling. “The withdrawal from German politics and my mediator role in the Yugoslav war occurred out of a deep conviction that I must do what I can to prevent a repetition of European history.” September 18, 2006 . [Courtesy: Deutschland Magazine, Embassy of Germany ]
|
