Dear HumanDHS network friends
Please find below the Common Ground Newsbulletin 14 June - 1 July 2009
Kind regards
Brian Ward
Common Ground Newsbulletin 14 June - 1 July 2009
The Common Ground News Service (CGNews) aims to promote constructive perspectives and dialogue on a broad range of issues affecting Arab-Israeli & Muslim-Western relations. CGNews is available in Arabic, English, French, Hebrew, Indonesian and Urdu. To subscribe, click here. For an archive of past CGNews articles, please visit our website at www.commongroundnews.org .
Inside this edition 14 - 01 July 2009
Reviving Pakistan’s founding principles
by Haroon Nasir
In this first article in a series on pluralism in Muslim-majority countries, Haroon Nasir, research associate at the Christian Study Centre, considers how responding to religious extremism can help Pakistanis of all faiths work together toward a more tolerant and inclusive society.
(Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 14 July 2009)
Displaced Pakistanis speak out
by Mustafa Qadri
Mustafa Qadri, Middle East and South Asia correspondent for The Diplomat magazine, speaks to some of Pakistan’s internally displaced to learn about their reasons for leaving and their thoughts on the conflict.
(Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 14 July 2009)
Madrasa enhancement in Pakistan
by Heather DuBois
Heather DuBois, assistant director of the Religion and Conflict Resolution programme at the Tanenbaum Center for Interreligious Understanding, describes how one non-profit organisation is working to build interfaith trust and understanding, starting in Pakistan’s madrasas.
(Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 14 July 2009)
Challenges and opportunities of US withdrawal from Iraq
by Safa A. Hussein
Following the 30 June withdrawal of American forces from Iraqi cities, Safa A. Hussein, a former member of the now dissolved Iraqi Governing Council, explores the ways in which the Iraqi government and Iraqi Security Forces can work toward a stable and peaceful Iraq.
(Source: bitterlemons-international.org, 2 July 2009)
Will Islamic opposition movements seize the day?
by Amr Hamzawy and Jeffrey Christiansen
The Carnegie Middle East Center’s Amr Hamzawy and Jeffrey Christiansen consider what it will take for Islamic opposition movements across the Arab world to respond to US President Barack Obama’s willingness to engage.
(Source: Al Ahram, 2-8 July 2009)
Reviving Pakistan’s founding principles
Haroon Nasir
Rawalpindi, Pakistan - On 11 August 1947, a newly-formed Pakistan had its first session of the Constituent Assembly, which was formed to write Pakistan’s constitution and serve as its first parliament. Joginder Nath Mandal, a Hindu from a caste that traditionally had been socially marginalised, was nominated as its chairman. Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, declared, “You are free; you are free to go to your temples; you are free to go to your mosques or any other place of worship in the state of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed – that has nothing to do with the business of the state.”
Thus, Jinnah set a pluralistic model for Pakistan to grow as a modern Muslim state. After his death in 1948, however, this model was largely ignored and incumbent leaders in Pakistan, which is 96.5 percent Muslim, have often used religion as a tool to divide rather unite.
In 1949, the Objectives Resolution was passed as a preamble to the constitution, declaring Pakistan an Islamic state governed by Islamic principles. The Ahmadiyya, a Muslim community that believes the second advent of Jesus has been fulfilled, were declared non-Muslims by the National Assembly in 1954. And Christian missionary educational and health institutions were nationalised in 1972 resulting in the degradation of standards and performance, and the marginalisation of the Christian missionary community that was running these institutions quite effectively before.
In the late 1970s and early 1980s, in an attempt to gain legitimacy for his military rule, President General Zia-ul-Haq started an “Islamisation” process. His government began to implement shari’a (a legal system based on Islamic principles), by enforcing the Hudud Ordinance. This law allowed punishments such as stoning, amputations and lashings for extramarital relations, theft and consuming alcohol, based on the rulings of certain Islamic jurists who believed there was a historical precedent.
During those years, the public school curriculum was revised to incorporate an overwhelmingly religious component to build “Islamic character” in the nation’s youth and glorify Muslim heroes. The new curriculum overlooked non-Muslim Pakistanis and their role in national development, polarising society along religious lines.
Despite these policies, however, ordinary Pakistanis never lost hope for the model envisaged by its founders: a pluralistic society within a Muslim-majority country.
Finding in religious extremism a common threat, Pakistanis of all faiths, ethnicities and cultures have begun working together for a more tolerant Pakistan. Support for victims of the 2005 earthquake and internally displaced people as a result of conflict between the Taliban and the government transcends religious boundaries.
A growing presence by civil society organisations, campaigning for human and women’s rights, civil liberties and civic responsibility, demonstrates a will for equality. And a number of volunteer grassroots initiatives, such as the Critical Mass Movement, the Lawyers’ Movement and Hum (We) Pakistani, are reviving a collective sense of hope by providing aid and support to displaced people and organising youth to help clean cities and run awareness campaigns that rise above religious, cultural and ethnic loyalties.
The country needs to build upon these movements and act immediately to correct the mistakes of the past and transform this challenge into an opportunity. The following steps can help put the country back on track:
1) Reform the public school curriculum so that it accommodates all Pakistanis and inculcates students with a mindset that is respectful of differences and emphasises the benefits of pluralism in a modern nation.
2) Revise madrasa (Islamic religious school) curricula to include subjects like social and natural sciences, math, foreign languages and literature, social and civic studies and world religions, all of which expose students to a broader understanding of domestic and international affairs.
3) Highlight the constructive contributions of non-Muslim Pakistanis in the media. Through proper training, media can play a role by covering positive stories and refraining from defaming minority groups.
4) Remove and change discriminatory laws that are making the mutual coexistence of Muslims and non-Muslims difficult, such as the blasphemy law (Sections 295-B and 295-C of the Pakistani Penal Code), which has often been used to try non-Muslims accused of defiling the Qur’an or making derogatory remarks about the Prophet Muhammad, and the law of witness, which claims that a woman’s testimony is not equal to a man’s and that a non-Muslim is unable to testify against a Muslim.
>From the time of Pakistan’s founding, non-Muslims have been an integral part of the state. The flag of Pakistan reflects this diversity: the white portion of the flag on the left representing the non-Muslim population and the dark green portion on the right its Muslim constituency.
It will be no easy feat but Pakistanis need to revive the spirit of unity in diversity that shaped its founding principles.
###
* Haroon Nasir is a research associate at the Christian Study Centre in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. This article is part of a series on pluralism in Muslim-majority countries written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 14 July 2009, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission is granted for publication.
Return to top
Displaced Pakistanis speak out
Mustafa Qadri
Karachi, Pakistan - Pakistan is in the middle of its largest operation against the Taliban in the troubled Swat Valley and adjacent areas.
Although a small first wave of refugees has begun to return as part of the government’s efforts, up to 2.5 million people are believed to have fled the once quiet, scenic mountain ranges. At a camp in Risalpur, 50 miles south of some of the fiercest battle zones, I spoke with some of the displaced.
“We travelled by foot from Mingora to Kokkari, then we went to Sangar… some nine miles, [before taking a bus to Risalpur]“, says Mohammad Yahya, former mayor of a village near Mingora.
Entire communities, including women, children and the elderly, made the journey through high mountainous terrain. Almost all were forced to travel on foot because public transport was either too dangerous or expensive.
The displaced communities live a rudimentary life typically huddled together in cramped dwellings or tents without running water or electricity. Mountain dwellers their entire lives, they are not used to the extreme summer heat of the lower lying districts of Mardan and Risalpur, nor of Peshawar, some 55 miles south, where most have sought refuge. Diarrhoea and water borne diseases, exacerbated by the heat, are very common, particularly among the youngest.
“One night there was a series of explosions on the outskirts of the village”, says 11-year-old student Mannu, whom I met in one of the bare dwellings of Risalpur’s industrial area, donated to the displaced by local businessmen. Mannu’s entire village, around 13 families, approximately 200 people, decided to flee their homes the morning following the blasts.
But homelessness is only one of the impacts of this war. Swat is famous for its rich array of fruit and other cash crops. Because the conflict started at the height of the harvesting period last May, the largely agrarian population has lost much of its earnings for the year.
Mingora, the largest city in Swat and one of the epicentres of the clashes between the Taliban and army, was transformed into a fortress by the insurgents. It was only recaptured after devastating military bombardment that, according to locals and unofficial army sources, killed overwhelmingly more civilians than militants.
However, when asked who bears the responsibility for these crises, it appears that the displaced harbour deep resentment towards the Taliban for their role in annihilating their once peaceful neighbourhoods.
“These Taliban say they fight for the rule of Islam”, says Purmanari. “They say there is no Islam in Swat. But what, are we not Muslim?”
“The Taliban say they want shari’a (a legal system based on Islamic principles), but what kind of shari’a is this – killing and looting? It is just a game to them”, says Mannu.
Mannu dared to seek an education in a region of Swat where the Taliban openly forbade women from doing so. “I’m not afraid of going to school”, she says defiantly when asked about her studies. Risking physical harm as the Taliban destroyed over 200 schools, Mannu continued to attend one of the few schools that remained open before she eventually fled with her family.
“We are not afraid because we are doing the right thing”, says Ziauddin Yousufzai, a school teacher. “The people who are preventing our female students from getting an education, they should be afraid. Islam teaches us that getting an education is compulsory for everyone. This is the teaching of the Prophet Muhammad. I own Islam as much as it is owned by the Taliban. Why should I be dictated to by the Taliban? Islam instead motivates me to give education to my children because education is light and ignorance is darkness.”
The darkness seems to have engulfed Swat. Yet the displaced are using poetry, such as these words from Mannu, to brighten their plight:
“My sweet Swat has caught fire, not just from one side but from everywhere./ The fire has engulfed everything – our people, our customs, our schools, our markets./ My beautiful Swat, with its valleys and peaks, its perfumed flowers, all have lost their lustre./ In every direction there is war. The people, who laughed, who sang, are now silent./ The once majestic and peaceful River Swat has dried up./ I pray to you God, bring back the paradise, the peaceful Swat I remember.”
###
* Mustafa Qadri (mustafaqadri.net) is the Middle East and South Asia correspondent for The Diplomat magazine and newmatilda.com. This article was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 14 July 2009, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission is granted for publication.
Return to top
Madrasa enhancement in Pakistan
Heather DuBois
New York, New York - While in Sarajevo to receive the Tanenbaum Center for Interreligious Understanding’s 2006 Peacemaker in Action award at a religious peace makers’ conference, Azhar Hussain stayed up late every night talking to local taxi drivers. In addition to an appreciation for good stories, he conversed with them believing that the best way to understand culture, religion and tradition is to talk to – and learn from – people on the ground. This simple act embodies Hussain’s approach to conflict resolution: that dialogue and shared experiences are integral to building trust and understanding, especially at the grassroots level.
Hussain is vice president for Preventive Diplomacy at the International Center for Religion & Diplomacy (ICRD) and head of its Pakistan Madrasa Project. The programme, now in its fifth year, has trained over 2,200 administrators and teachers from more than 1,400 madrasas (Islamic religious schools) throughout Pakistan. A recently published monograph, Madrasa Enhancement and Global Security: A Model for Faith-Based Engagement, outlines this programme’s implementation in Pakistan, which is fast becoming a promising model worthy of further study and replication for all schools.
Instead of heeding calls to marginalise madrasas, ICRD has sought to identify, accentuate and enhance the positive roles they can play in peace-building and conflict resolution. The programme’s participatory training workshops have tapped into existing support and resources for human rights, religious tolerance, critical thinking, conflict resolution and the inclusion of social and scientific disciplines into curricula.
All the prevalent Islamic schools of thought within Pakistan are represented in these workshops that encourage participation by providing a space for diverse voices. This has become the norm despite existing sectarian divisions. Educators now have opportunities to discuss curricula, as well as Islamic philosophy, with religious leaders of other sects. The intra-faith aspect of this model is an additional, remarkable achievement.
The graduates of ICRD’s Training of Trainers programmes have already conducted over 100 one-day workshops in Pakistan’s four provinces for other educators. Some have gone on to initiate their own training programmes on peace education and religious tolerance. One of ICRD’s indigenous partners also initiated a series of interfaith seminars to facilitate cooperation between Pakistani Muslim and Christian leaders in reducing religious extremism and discrimination.
At one such workshop involving leaders from 16 madrasas surrounding the Swat Valley, one participant – involved with a well-known militant group – stood up toward the end and declared that he had attended the workshop only to discredit everything it was teaching. But as a result of his participation, he felt that for the first time in his life he understood the true, peaceful intent of the Qur’an. He stated: “After this experience, I want to help my students appreciate the different religious groups of people who live in our community and our country. My kids need to know that only by being peaceful can they spread true Islam.”
Another participant used Islamic principles of forgiveness – coupled with conflict resolution skills he had learned in the workshop – to prevent the tribal elders in his village from executing a girl after she was deemed to have violated tribal codes by contacting a boy in a neighbouring village.
Still another indigenous partner working with ICRD played an instrumental role in securing the release of the 21 Korean Christians taken hostage by the Taliban in Afghanistan in July 2007. Notably, the captors were engaged through appeals to Islamic principles.
ICRD is now operating on many levels to scale up the Pakistan Madrasa Project, extending it to girls’ schools and universities, bringing key administrators and instructors together, facilitating US study visits and developing certificate programmes.
At the core of the growth and success of the Pakistan Madrasa Project is the belief that local actors, including religious ones, can play a crucial role in peacemaking – but only if they are engaged. Transformation from an adversarial approach to a constructive, humane one cannot be dictated, but it can be inspired. And, as with the taxi drivers of Sarajevo, Hussain has shown us that this often begins with simple conversations.
###
* Heather DuBois is assistant director of the Religion and Conflict Resolution programme at the Tanenbaum Center for Interreligious Understanding in New York City. Madrasa Enhancement and Global Security: A Model for Faith-based Engagement is available for online purchase (www.icrd.org). This article was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).
Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 14 July 2009, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission is granted for publication.
Return to top
Challenges and opportunities of US withdrawal from Iraq
Safa A. Hussein
Baghdad - On 30 June, Iraqi tanks and vehicles rolled out to participate in a national celebration of the withdrawal of American forces from Iraqi cities. Article 24 of the security agreement set this date as the deadline for US combat forces to withdraw from all Iraqi cities, villages and localities. The agreement also calls for all US forces to be withdrawn by 31 December 2011. Accordingly, the American military had been gradually pulling its combat forces out of Iraq’s population centres for months and completed the withdrawal two days ahead of the deadline.
When Iraqis and Americans concluded their negotiations on a security agreement last December, many observers wondered what the effect of an early, fixed-date withdrawal of American forces would be on Iraq’s stability. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, to his credit, insisted that withdrawal would provide substantial momentum for the political process and would outweigh the security risks that might result from the withdrawal.
What, then, are the challenges and opportunities that withdrawal brings?
The first challenge is security: the capability of the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) to successfully assume responsibility in each province. In the ten days preceding withdrawal, a series of attacks targeting civilians killed more than 200 Iraqis. Al-Maliki had warned of a potential increase in attacks around the withdrawal date aimed at discrediting the Iraqi government and ISF, but he was confident that the ISF would be capable of providing security for Iraqi cities after US combat troops withdrew.
Senior American officers affirmed this and emphasised that their forces would work aggressively in the outer rural belts to prevent infiltration of terrorists into the cities.
The ISF are making real progress and building confidence in the Iraqi capacity to cope with security challenges, including Al Qaeda and other militants. Iraq’s intelligence capabilities also continue to mature. A series of large offensive operations conducted by the ISF in spring and summer 2008 demonstrated their ability to rapidly deploy in large numbers.
Local security forces in Samarra (100 km north of Baghdad) successfully protected more than 200,000 pilgrims who visited the holy site on 26 June.
Two years ago, Samarra was a dangerous area for visitors, as well as for local residents.
Political reconciliation, required to remedy Iraq’s political, ethnic and sectarian divisions, is the largest challenge facing the Iraqi government.
Tensions between Arabs and Kurds over disputed territory, distribution of wealth and oil revenues and distribution of power in the north between the regional and federal governments is critical to Iraq’s future.
The Kurdistan Region’s constitution that was passed recently by the Kurdish parliament may add to these tensions. US forces had been playing a role in easing them by encouraging dialogue to try and bridge differences.
This role should now be transferred to the US embassy with the resources necessary to accomplish it.
Implementation of the security agreement and the withdrawal of American troops also present new opportunities to the Iraqi government. Iraqi public opinion generally sees the United States as an occupying power and wants it and other coalition forces to leave as soon as possible. Various militant groups have exploited the slogan, “resisting the occupiers” in their struggle for power.
Now, with the withdrawal of American forces, it will be a hard sell for the militants to convince people that they are fighting for liberty.
Unless they lay down their weapons and reconcile, they will lose many of their supporters. Iraqi cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, whose militants are a major security threat, released a statement urging Iraqi citizens to support the ISF and counselled his followers to participate in a new era of “political resistance” in Iraq and reject violent activities.
Even a top figure in the insurgency, Izzat al-Douri (Saddam Hussein’s former deputy chairman of the Iraqi Revolutionary Command Council), published a speech on the web early Tuesday asking his group not to attack Iraqi security forces, though he urged Iraqis to keep fighting Americans “wherever they may be in Iraq”.
The US redeployment also presents an opportunity for Iraq regarding its foreign relations. Some neighbouring countries held negative attitudes toward Iraq because they felt the presence of American forces there posed a direct threat to them. They reacted by intervening to destabilise Iraq.
The withdrawal of American forces will enhance the opportunity to build healthy relations with these countries.
In addition, many countries were hesitant to build normal economic and diplomatic relations with Iraq because of their doubts regarding the ability of Iraq’s government to prevail. Al-Maliki has rightly described the transition as “a new phase that will bolster Iraqi’s sovereignty and send a message to the world that we are now able to safeguard our security and administer our internal affairs.”
###
* Safa A. Hussein is a former deputy member of the dissolved Iraqi Governing Council and now works in the Iraqi National Security Council. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) with permission from bitterlemons-international.org.
Source: bitterlemons-international.org, 2 July 2009, www.bitterlemons-international.org
Copyright permission is granted for publication.
Return to top
Will Islamic opposition movements seize the day?
Amr Hamzawy and Jeffrey Christiansen
Beirut - When it comes to democratic development in the Arab world, the ball is now squarely in the court of Islamic opposition movements. US President Barack Obama has spoken. Defying expectations that he would downplay domestic affairs and democracy promotion in favour of a more realist outlook, Obama used his platform at Cairo University to enunciate fresh policy. The United States, he stated, will respect “all law-abiding voices… even if we disagree with them” and will “welcome all elected, peaceful governments”.
Obama was targeting a specific audience: Islamic opposition movements across the Arab world that have renounced violence, accepted the political process and currently represent a popular and potential force for pluralism in the region.
Now that the United States is willing to engage them, what will it take for them to come to the table?
Islamic opposition movements need the United States more than they are ready to admit. They seek international recognition as a serious political force. And they want the United States to define its commitment to democracy in the Arab world to mean applying pressure on Arab regimes for greater political pluralism. But they will have to send Obama consistent signs of their intentions.
Their responses to Obama’s speech were hardly an example of bold outreach.
In Morocco, the Justice and Development Party said Obama’s speech was “certainly positive” but questioned US diplomacy towards the Arab-Israeli conflict. In the Palestinian territories, Hamas initially criticised Obama for more of the same US policy but later recognised its “positive language”. In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood criticised Obama for ignoring the “authoritarian regimes and corrupt systems” in the region. Most of them restated familiar criticisms.
To capture US attention, however, Islamic opposition movements need to address two core US concerns: would their positions on key international issues value stability? And would their positions on key domestic issues reflect a commitment to democratic ideals and procedures?
Internationally, the biggest concern is that Islamic movements would aim to disrupt the international system. Would they, in fact, honour their countries’ obligations under existing international agreements? Would a government controlled by the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, for example, abide by the terms of the Camp David agreement and maintain diplomatic relations with the Jewish state? Would the Jordanian Brotherhood respect the peace treaty between Jordan and Israel? Can Hamas commit to the Oslo framework and recognise Israel’s right to exist? There should be no doubt that failing to recognise their countries’ treaties would perpetuate the “pariah” status of these movements in the eyes of the United States.
Domestically, Islamic movements need to clarify their stance on several issues. On the role of Islam in politics, they cannot repudiate their commitment to sharia (a legal system based on Islamic principles).
But they could allay many fears by being clearer about the principles of sharia they consider central.
These movements also need to address their dual identity as both religious movements and political actors. Some movements, like the Justice and Development Party in Morocco, have already established separate political movements. But others, like the powerful Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, while prevented by the government from forming a political party, are nonetheless reluctant to commit to one in principle.
Religious movements deal with absolutes – issues of good and evil, of right and wrong – and can demand conformity from their members as long as membership is voluntary. Political movements, by contrast, make – or participate in making – decisions that affect all citizens, and thus have to respect basic principles shared by all. They must tolerate dissent, be open to compromise, and follow domestic law, even if they do not approve of it. Movements that fail to separate their political and religious identities risk ending up betwixt and between, where their democratic credentials could be in doubt.
Finally, these movements must clarify their stances on women and minorities. It is not enough to issue general statements about their respect for women and minorities within a politicised Islamic framework; they need to clarify their position on the rights of women vis-à-vis male family members and treat women and men equally in the public domain. Also, clarity has been missing on the side of many of these movements regarding the right of religious minorities to hold public office.
As Islamic movements formulate their positions on these issues they should keep in mind Obama’s single standard for all who hold power: “You must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party.”
Addressing these concerns would go a long way in persuading the United States to engage Islamic movements in making the Arab world a better place. Of course, at the end of the day, it’s the authoritarian rulers themselves who must reform. But a pragmatic collaboration between the new US administration and peaceful Islamic movements could spur such rulers towards a more pluralistic Arab world. Now that the ball is in their court, Islamic opposition movements should seize the moment.
###
* Amr Hamzawy is a senior associate, and Jeffrey Christiansen is a researcher, at the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) with permission from Al Ahram.
Source: Al Ahram, 2-8 July 2009, weekly.ahram.org.eg
Copyright permission is granted for publication.
Mock Tribunals