Terrorist sympathizers?

This article has been published with some changes at
http://www.thenews.com.pk/print/81924-Terrorist-sympathisers

 “You should not be walking through the lobbies with Jeremy Corbyn and a bunch of terrorist sympathizers,” the prime minister of UK David Cameron said on 2nd Dec, 2015. This is the same rhetoric that Mr. Bush repeated. "Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists," he said in 2001. But the British parliamentarians and the public responded in an enlightened manner. Scottish National Party leader Alex Salmond responded “Would the prime minister apologize for his “deeply insulting remarks”?” And another party spokesman said: “He clearly realizes he has failed to make a convincing case for military action in Syria and opinion is shifting away from him.” Similarly, sam hinrichs, A british citizen tweeted “i'd rather see money go into education than war, therefore i am a #terroristsympathiser”

Just like Britain and US, Pakistani state attempts to define its narrative on terrorism in a binary “Yes or No” and “with us or against us” fashion. If you do not support military operations, you are a terrorist sympathizer. If you criticize National Action plan, you might be labeled a terrorist yourself. Opinion space is limited in an emotional manner and support for the state narrative is presented as the only sane way to move forward. However, a person with even the slightest of intellectual sense would agree that in matters of state policy there can be several other possibilities.

The issue of terrorism has become a widely debated topic. The first point in this discussion which is widely agreed upon is the definition of terrorism i.e. “Non-state Islamist motivated militancy”. Even in the recent California shooting incident, the discussion was focused on “is it a criminal activity?” or “is it a terrorist activity”. The second question in this discourse is “What should be the most effective counter terrorism policy”. To us Pakistanis, this is a vital question because we are directly affected from this menace but it seems that Pakistan’s ruling circle seem to be mostly confused or unclear. It is because, National Action plan(NAP), which is the most recent endeavor for uprooting the menace of terrorism, faces a series of issues.

The first issue is the scope of NAP. For instance, The Peshawar school incident was correctly not treated as a criminal activity but a terrorist activity because it was based on islamist motivated militancy. But NAP has been somewhat deliberately mixed with criminal acts and corruption issues. Considering Arrests of MQM workers, PPP workers or other political cases or issues of corruption in KMC or NADRA or Land issues or arrest of pilot of shaheen airline are wrongfully associated with NAP. These acts are some of the several superficial attempts made to generalize terrorism just to give NAP a neutral cover.

The second issue is to curb Islamist motivated militancy by targeting even the non-militant Islamists. NAP attempts to target all Islamists across the board who are not involved in militancy with the pretext of terrorist sympathizers. It is generally assumed by the architects and supporters of NAP that Islamist thoughts residing in the society can easily cross the line of political, religious or economic discussion to militant struggle and therefore all Islamists need to be targeted. But upon critical assessment, this policy comes with a dangerous consequence because Pakistan is a predominantly a Muslim society and these non-militant Islamists are an active component of society. Amongst them are those who are democratic, political, intellectual, revolutionary and preachers of non-militant thought.  Seminaries, Universities, Mosques, Doctors, Engineers, Scientists, Educationalists, businessmen etc are filled with Islamist thoughts and religious people.

Such Islamists should not be marginalized as being Sympathizers and prosecuted. For Instance, pointing at Al-Huda for tashfeen Malik issue, connecting Tanzeem-e-islami with Safoora carnage, criminalizing members of Hizb-ut-tahrir on media for spreading their ideas, arrests of Ulema, raids on seminaries etc is a huge mistake. Groups like these and their likes have an intellectual/political understanding of things and should be dealt by discussions and serious debate on Ideas regarding military operations or IDPs or Drone Issues etc.  Thoughts and ideas should be countered with better ideas and thoughts.  Dealing it in military style and spreading fear would increase the depth of the problem. It reflects that state is enemy of all Islamist. It would convince the Islamists that since you are not allowed to discuss, do political activism, you get negative media coverage, cyber crime law etc, the only way to solve the problem is to fight the state. This would escalate grievances, squeeze space of islamist opinion and ultimately justify the militant cause.

A clear example in front of us is the case of balochistan. The people of Balochistan think that there is no other way to solve the problem other than militant struggle. The more we try to suppress the voices, the more radical society starts to become and hence more violent and it opens up space for militancy! This military style solution, which has been employed by several arab countries mostly pushes the country on the verge of chaos and there comes a tipping point when people want to break free from the suffocating environment just like Syria. 

Third issue that NAP faces is linked with our historical foreign policy decisions. It was this very state which built madarassas and introduced curriculum for promoting Jihad on the pre-text of supporting the American project against the soviet. If we would have followed an independent and intelligent policy, we would have been probably in a much better situation. The 94-page policy document titled “National Internal Security Policy”, states “A large number of terrorists, either are, or have been students of madrassas where they were brainwashed to take up arms against the state,”. Interestingly, those 22,000 madrassas identified by the policy document and people with similar thinking reside widely in the society from 80s. They were never our problem until we made yet another foreign policy decision after 9/11. We supported the American project in Afghanistan yet again. Unfortunately, the very people we created in over throwing the Soviets were in the mood to overthrow U.S. Thus this militancy which was a freedom struggle in Afghanistan moved as terrorism in Pakistan. We had to pray a serious price for the American war on terror. Ironically, we worked for the American project during 80s by radicalizing our people and we are working for the American project after the 2000s by now de-radicalizing them. I must ask here that, where is our independent thinking? Why are we not setting up directions for ourselves as a nation which is better for us? These questions must be answered for taking NAP ahead in the correct direction.

To sum it all up, a rational and meaningful attempt should be made to identify the issues of NAP and any criticism on this issue should not be dealt with a David Cameron like statement. This discussion can be either treated as “an approach of terrorist sympathizer or apologist” or as Winston Churchill once said “Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things.”

Link down! The horrors of getting your passport renewed in Pakistan

This article has been published with some changes at
http://www.dawn.com/news/1219194/link-down-the-horrors-of-getting-your-passport-renewed-in-pakistan

My passport expired last year and I did not dare to think of a renewal, knowing full well the horrors of going to the passport office and doing the khwari. 

But as a PhD student, I had to publish at least one paper internationally. Luckily, mine got accepted for “IS&T International Symposium on Electronic Imaging 2016 in Video Surveillance and Transportation Imaging Applications Conference” in San Francisco. I could no longer put the renewal off.

One fateful Tuesday morning, I finally willed myself to go to the main passport office. I arrived at 8.30am, and as I was walking towards the head office, about a dozen people who wanted to 'help' me get my passport renewed descended upon me out of nowhere!

The 'agents'

Commonly known as ‘agents’, they have bank challan (tickets) in their hands and are ever-ready to assist you – minus the khwari, at a cost, of course.

They guarantee the submission of any application in under 15 minutes and promise to deliver the passport to your house. The offer sounded too good to be true so I did not pay any heed to the clamour and went directly inside the office.

To my dismay, I saw four haphazard queues, with no idea what to do or where to start. I looked around but failed to find an information counter.

Fortunately, I spotted a colleague who had come for a renewal too. He explained the entire process to me and advised that I should go to the regional branch at Awami Markaz on Sharae Faisal, which covers my locality. "Also, it won’t be this crowded," he had said.

He did mention, however, "Wahan link down hojata hai kabhi kabhi." (Their server link is sometimes 'down'.)

I thanked him and rushed to the regional office. A flock of agents descended once again. I ignored them and went straight ahead. This office was definitely better structured than the previous one.

Thankfully, I found an information counter as well. The man behind the desk said I would need to submit the fee at the bank and would additionally need my expired passport and original Identity Card along with their photocopies. That bank's branch was on the 2nd floor of the building I was standing in (Awami Markaz). I went down, submitted my fee, and came back up again to find a queue the likes of which I had never seen before!

The long wait

It was already 10:30am, and I had to go to the university so I decided to come back later. The next day at 9:30am, I was standing in line for a token once again. The queue was so long that it stretched out of the office and into the street under the naked gaze of the sun.

While I was waiting, I started chatting with the people around me. I was unnerved at what they had to share; a gentleman who is a senior manager at a bank told me that the last time he came, he had spent hours finishing all prerequisites, carefully collecting and organising all documents, and when he reached the last counter for the final stamp, he was asked for the original ID cards of his parents!

Another one told me that he was asked for his matriculation certificate. A third was asked for his latest electricity bill. They were told that their process could not begin without the aforementioned records.

I argued that the information counter had not mentioned any of these requirements. They smiled at my naiveté. Suddenly it struck me, after all this trouble I could still get rejected at the final counter for not having some random document.

As our queue moved forward at a sluggish pace, I did finally manage to get out of the scorching sun and under the shade. To my utter dismay, I felt a gush of hot air right above my head. I looked up to find two AC heaters droning on.

On moving forward, I saw a guard standing near the counter religiously trying to keep the queue in proper order. He was not letting anyone outside of the line go in directly. I salute the guard for that. Many people came with big references but he wouldn't budge.

Finally and at last, I was inside the office. I realised that there were just two counters; one for men and one for women. However, on close scrutiny I saw that there was another counter to get tokens. I had been standing in this line for almost an hour and was still waiting for my turn, but I saw some people coming in with agents from the exit door, going directly for their tokens without having to wait in line.

We were furious at this point. This continuous intrusion was delaying our turn. Someone behind me started shouting. We all joined in and soon the Assistant Director sahab came and calmed us down. He ‘scolded’ the token guys for the lapse.

After 2 hours of waiting, I got my token, pictures and thumb impressions done, and then came the time for data entry. The space between the token counter and data entry counter was so cramped, one could only stand sideways. Men, women, the elderly and children, all stood in a state of asphyxiation because the air conditioners were barely working.

All of this had started to feel like a very tedious and unpleasant experience. Some tried to ignore the surroundings by blankly staring at a cricket match on a tiny TV screen in a corner.

The two most frightening words

Just as I was thinking it couldn't get any worse, someone shouted:

“Link down!”

This meant that all work would now stop. And here we were standing half suffocated, while the staff began to relax. They ordered tea for themselves and started watching the cricket match.

I remembered that I had once discussed the passport renewal process with one of my university colleagues and he had told me that he got it made through an agent.

Interestingly, the agent had told him “Sirjee jaldi karain, link down honay ka time hogaya hay.” (Hurry up sir, it's time for the link to go down.)

Almost immediately, I understood what had passed. By then, another 40 minutes had gone by and now people were starting to get angry.

By 12:15pm, I felt certain my work would not be done that day. And just as I was standing there feeling terrible about it, the assistant director announced that they could only process passport renewal applications and would not be entertaining other requests.

I was in luck!

They took my token and called my friends and I one by one. I was done in the next five minutes!

Then came the dreaded last counter which would decide the fate of my application. As I moved towards the counter, I glanced at the irritable faces of all the people still expecting to hear: ‘Link up’.

At the final counter, there was a plaque with the words 'Assistant Director' on it. The director sahab, who was by then under a lot of pressure, did not ask me anything and just signed off my application.

I couldn’t believe the relief that washed over me as I realised I was finally done.

However, the respite was short-lived as this experience made me realise how 'genuinely' interested the government is in the affairs of its people

This is just my experience. Almost everyone across the country has similar stories of horror to share about public hospitals, police stations, license offices, schools or district councils or other government-run institutes.

And then, how are we to feel when we look at the parliamentary lounges, the chief minister houses, governor houses, or presidential palaces or the army generals GHQ, the core commanders places etc? Our political and military elite seem to be taking pretty good care of themselves. Either be at this point in time or earlier.

When I think about the developed world, I can safely say that they think about the well being of their citizens irrespective of who is in power in the government. Why can’t we say this for Pakistan from the day of its inception? Even after 68 years, did we not get any leadership which could solve our problems? My analysis is that we have many many good people but what we lacked as a nation was a revived ideological approach towards life. This ideological approach unites a society and moves it towards developing systems which align their thinking. This had been the case for every revived nation in history. Whether it be under the capitalist model or the communist model or the model of Islamic governance in the history under Caliphate. Replacing an administrator here or there, making a country a police state or making NAB strong will not make us a nation that cares for its people. I urge the day when we will have a system and a leadership that would elevate the situation of the masses. 

Let us play our role in spreading awareness about the incompetence of the ruling elite and the ruling systems so that they are pressured enough to be changed or be replaced. 

Taliban as Reconciliation Partners

This article has been published with some changes at
http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9-351677-Taliban-as-partners

“We actually view the Taliban as being an important partner in a peaceful Afghan-led reconciliation process. We are not actively targeting the Taliban,” Pentagon spokesman Navy Captain Jeff Davis said on 5th November. This is a very significant statement given by the US department of Defense.

The Americans have been trying for peace talks with the Taliban for quite some time now from its start in Qatar, then China and most recently in Pakistan. Interestingly, the American President George Bush had said earlier in September 2004 that  “And as a result of the United States military, Taliban no longer is in existence. And the people of Afghanistan are now free.” And in December 2004: “In Afghanistan, America and our allies, with a historically small force and a brilliant strategy, defeated the Taliban in just a few short weeks.” After more than 14 years of celebrated victory and elimination of the Taliban, Americans seem to be back to square one! The Americans changed their position regarding Taliban so drastically that one can only view this as a complete failure of American control in the region.  

The statement from the pentagon becomes very much out of the ordinary when it is connected with the very recent battle of Kunduz which led to the downfall of the city on 28th September and then re-taken by Afghan forces with the help of Americans till 15th October. One security official briefed on the situation in Kunduz estimated that the Taliban force in the city numbered 500 against the estimated government forces of 7,000 troops in the area. “The problem wasn’t lack of security forces,” Zalmai Farooqi, a district governor who had retreated to the airport said, “but there was no good leadership to command these men.” This somewhat seems to be a repeat telecast of the episode of Mosul in Iraq. As mentioned by the Americans earlier, since they are not actively targeting the Taliban, it was the first time since 2001 that they had taken control of a major city in Afghanistan. But why are Americans doing this? If we analyze this situation critically, we can see that the fall of Kunduz in this climate holds great value for the American plan to stabilize Afghanistan.

Initially, American plan to stabilize Afghanistan had been to secure a government without Taliban as any stakeholders in the region and permanent presence of American troops to have a strong grip over Eurasia region. But when it failed, and they could not finish off the resistance against them, the plan changed and included Taliban as a small stakeholder along with American installed regime in Afghanistan and American military presence. For this the Americans allowed the Taliban to make an official office in Qatar, took them out of the list of terrorist organization, released several high profile prisoners, involved Pakistan to get support. But the Taliban under the leadership of Mullah Umar were adamant that Americans leave Afghanistan and the regime of Hamid karzai be completely removed and Taliban be given full Afghan Emirate as was before the occupation. This was naturally too much for the Americans to swallow as it would mean a defeat of exceptional bounds in the international arena and waste of billions of dollars and destroying a country for no reason.

Recently, the revised American plan for Afghanistan has seen some light. The change in regime in Kabul with Ashraf ghani and change in leadership of the Taliban and the end of American combat mission in Afghanistan are serious factors supporting the revised plan. Ashraf Ghani is much more open for discussions with Taliban as compared to his predecessor Hamid Karzai. The Taliban new leader Mullah Akhter Mansoor is open for dialogue with more flexibility than Mullah Umar even though several Taliban leaders are still challenging his legitimacy. The Americans had to leave because their official combat mission has ended on 28th December, 2014 and therefore had to pull out the present force of 9,800 US troops till the end of 2015.

This situation seems to be matured for a Taliban-afghan govt-US negotiations. Additional hindrances being faced by the three stakeholders have been somewhat eased out with the battle of Kunduz. For instance: The incident of Kunduz consolidated the leadership of Mullah Akhter Mansoor. It must have also additionally convinced many voices in the Afghan regime of Ashraf Ghani for additional compensations for the Taliban. Because, the Kunduz incident is yet another harsh example that If anything the war torn country has seen in these years, is the surge in militancy by the Taliban resistance. Finally, this incident provides strong justification for the continued American presence in this region. American President Mr. Obama announced just after the kunduz incident that he would keep the forces till 2017 as because they do not want Afghanistan to become safe heaven for militants once again.

Moreover, there is another important stakeholder i.e. Pakistan. The dilemma for American and Afghan Govt is that they cannot enter negotiation without Pakistan. Even though Pakistan is not directly a party in the negotiation process but it has considerable influence over the Taliban through the tribal belt and its previous involvement during the soviet invasion. And it has been very fortunate for the Americans and Kabul regime that Pakistan is actively pushing the Afghan Taliban for peace talks. Not only this, Pakistan has also provided increasing level of support by launching several military operations in its tribal region against Haqqani Network and the likes. This is done to punish the Taliban who are against peace talks and to pressurize the remaining. Pakistan has done all this even though this has caused serious repercussions at home.

Even though, things seem to be moving positively for the Americans, the key player in all this is Mullah Akhter Mansoor. If he consolidates his control over Taliban resistance and is ready to accept power sharing with Ashraf Ghani and ready to accept the permanent presence of some American troops and bases, the Americans will be happier than ever.

This may still be very tough because mainstream Taliban narrative is that of their first leader Mullah Umar. Afghan journalist Raza Wazir rightly points out that “The key issue the Taliban is facing regarding talks is maintaining the unity of its rank and file. For years, the ground fighters have waged war under the banner of jihad, which is why it is now difficult for them to talk with the ‘puppet government.” For this, Mullah Akhter will have to get support of Pakistan to control the stubborn Taliban and make more attempts to control his grip over the Taliban movement and make a fundamental shift in their policy of 14 years. This is a tough endeavour. Either he does this with the help of Pakistanis and Americans and the Afghan government or He sticks to the Mullah Umar doctrine and frustrate the American plans even further.  

What we lose from Civil-nuclear deal with US

This article has been published with some changes at
http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9-350353-What-we-lose-from-a-civil-nuclear-deal

Ever since the discussion of the “Diplomatic blockbuster” of David Ignatius, there has been a sense of Achievement in the political, intellectual and military circles in Pakistan. It is being hailed as Pakistan’s greatest achievements by some amongst them because that would, maybe, equate us to the Indian-US nuclear deal of 2008. But let us deeply analyze this reality before jumping to any conclusions and celebrations.

What has India got from a US-India nuclear deal

The first and most important aspect of this discussion is to understand the reality of US-India nuclear deal. The discussion of nuclear deal with india that started in 2005, materialized in 2008 has not been able to conclude a single nuclear agreement with America or any other country till 2015. According to G. Balachandran, a consulting fellow at the New Delhi-based Institute for Defence Studies and Analysis, “The only nuclear cooperation that India has been able to conclude with any of the countries with whom it has nuclear cooperation agreements is in respect of nuclear fuel.” India had to lower its target of installed nuclear capacity from 63 GW by 2032 to 27.5 GW, as none of the proposed projects have started. Last year, Russia has agreed to setting up 10 nuclear reactors but that has nothing to do with the US-India Nuclear deal. Other than the prestige that comes with the name US-India Nuclear deal, there had been no practical effect of the deal for Indians Energy problems for the last 7 years after signing the deal. The question really arises, are we really dying for such a deal just because of our obsession with India?

What we will loose from a US-Pak nuclear deal

“Possible new limits and controls on Pakistan’s nuclear weapons and delivery systems,” David Ignatius, an opinion writer for the US-based newspaper said. It does not sound really encouraging now, does it? Peter R. Lavoy, a longtime intelligence expert on the Pakistani nuclear program, with close relations with the country’s military, and who is currently serving on the U.S. National Security Council, is known to be leading the discussions think that “There’s a political dimension with the Shaheen-III that I think is troubling to the US government, and to many other governments of representatives here in the audience, that now you will have the ability to reach many other countries, in the Middle East, for example, that Pakistan didn’t have that capacity in the past.” It is also described in The Washington Post and The New York Times, the American proposals center on Pakistan’s shortest-range missiles and long-range ones. So to sum it up, we will have to reduce our nuclear program to get a deal which might take 3 years to materialize and another 7 years to start discussing about giving us a civilian nuclear reactor. And off course if anything unusual happens, this deal can be taken off by the Americans, like the F-16 deal in the past in which we got wheat for the money of F-16s.  

What we will get from a US-Pak nuclear deal

Maybe, I am too cynical, so lets explore what we can get practically.  US support for a US-Pakistan civilian nuclear agreement, possible membership of 48-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) by US support and relaxation of Nuclear Suppliers Group export controls.

I have already discussed how beneficial can the US-Pak nuclear agreement be by comparing with the US-India deal. As far as NSG is concerned, for now, the symbolic significance of a place at the NSG carries no strategic weight for Pakistan, as it has explored alternative markets for its civil nuclear program. Pakistan has already been engaged with China, and to some extent with Russia, for its civil nuclear needs. China is involved in construction of at least six nuclear reactors in Pakistan. Wang Xiaotao, a key official of the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) said at a press conference “has assisted the construction of at least six nuclear reactors in Pakistan with a total installed capacity of 3.4 million kilowatts.” Most Importantly, China has never imposed any conditions on our Military Nuclear program after supporting us in building the civilian nuclear reactors.

There is another angle to this discussion. Even if we get the NSG membership and people start trading with us in the nuclear domain, we will always be looked at with suspicion. Our track record of the AQ Khan episode will always keep us in the spotlight.  For Instance, on October 20, Congressman Ted Poe, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Non-proliferation and Trade, urged Obama to not engage in any negotiations regarding a US-Pakistan civil nuclear agreement. "Simply put, Pakistan's current and past record is disqualifying for any consideration by the US to support civilian nuclear cooperation with Pakistan bilaterally”. I am sure that even if the Americans deal with us and we become an active partner in Nuclear Suppliers Group, they, along with the Indians would continue to blame us and blackmail us and humiliate us in the rest of the world. So this move is going to hurt our international standing in the long run despite all our efforts at strengthening the nuclear safety and security regime.

Thinking independently and making better choices for Pakistan

Other than the superficial argument, “whatever India wants, we want it too” there is nothing in it for Pakistan in this deal. We need to overcome our obsession with India and realize that we can make far better choices if we think independently for Pakistan. We already have secured a 46 billion dollar deal with China without any “CONDITIONS” from China on our military assets. Major part of the investment deals with resolving the energy crises as well. Apart from that, Pakistan has exceptional potential for Solar, Wind, Coal, Hydro energy options to meet the energy needs and unnecessary pushing for a US nuclear reactor is absolutely redundant for Pakistan.

Misconceptions about Shia Islam: A Sunni perspective

This article has been published at
http://www.pakistanherald.com/article/8259/30-october-2015/misconceptions-about-shia-islam(col)-a-sunni-perspective

The start of holy month of Moharram witnesses a serious debate regarding Shia Islam amongst the Sunni Muslims of Pakistan. Unfortunately in many of the aspects, this debate is driven by emotions and misconceptions and has no knowledge based reasoning. The misguiding concepts of the two groups about each other have done nothing more than seriously destroying the unity of Muslims around the world while provoking hatred and anger for each other. The discussions are mostly superficial and I being a sunni myself do not believe in the core shia concepts but I was once a believer of many misconceptions regarding Shias. However, it was not long ago that I started reading things by myself and having discussions with many shia friends on the misconceptions with a rational basis. I would like to share my evolution of thought in this matter with an aim of brining harmony between the two groups wherever possible and encouraging an atmosphere of constructive debates.

Shia Islam is a detailed and controversial topic in islamic history and requires serious understanding of Islamic fundamental thought before jumping to any conclusions but unfortunately, our society has a tendency of superficial thinking in some very critical matters. First of all, we need to know that there are several sects amongst the shias namely,  Jafari, Zaidi, Ismaili etc. In Pakistan, the only serious debate occurs between Jafari Shia and Sunnis. The other prominent groups like Agha Khanis and Bohris are seldom part of discussion because of their minority and very closed community structure. Zaidis are mostly found in Yemen so no discussion there as well.  

Now coming to the question, what is Jafari Shia Islam? If you ask a layman sunni, an abrubt answer would be that they are kafir (Non-Muslim) because they abuse sahaba like Hazrat Abu bakr(R.A), Hazrat Umar (R.A), Hazrat Ayesha (R.A) they believe Hazrat Ali (R.A.) is God, they pray from Hazrat Ali (R.A) and ask for his support, they do not believe in 30 chapters of Quran, they think Hazrat Ali (R.A) is above Prophet Mohammad (S.A.W), they pray three times, they think Hazrat Ali (R.A) is all knowing, they have changed the kalma, they do matam with knives and spill blood etc. This is supposed to be an informed answer from a sunni which is also mostly incorrect and filled with misconceptions. But if you talk to the badly informed ones, you would find nothing but hatred and bias to discuss Shias. For Instance, Shias are accused to be from the family of Jews and accused of spitting in food for a sunni muslim and there are several offensive terms used to describe them. This is all based on the rumours and misconceptions that are spread amongst the mainstream sunni families.

The best part in such a discussion with a sunni is that when you tell him that I ate lunch together with my shia friend and he did not spit on my plate nor has he changed his kalma, the answer is: Umair! You do not know. They do taqqayya (hide their faith) and they lie on your face. If that is true, then consequently, whatever the sunnis say about Shias is correct and whatever the Shias say in justification is taqqayya. I really do not buy this unusual logic in which only the accuser is correct and the accused is a liar and therefore the accused is guilty! What an absurd way of thinking!

After several discussions with my shia friends and some serious literature reading on this topic, I think I am in a position to clarify many of the misconceptions of my sunni fellows. The objective is not to offend any group with my views or to hurt the feelings of anyone but it is to initiate a sensible dialogue in an environment of lack of knowledge and misconceptions. The sole purpose is to highlight the notions that divide us but are not actually there.  

First point. The biggest misconception amongst sunnis is that all shia groups are the same. This causes the greatest hurdle in a fruitful discussion on this subject. In Pakistan and even across the muslim world, the mainstream majority shia group is generally known as the Twelver Shia or Ithnā'ashariyyah  or Imami or Ja'fari.  The second most influential group amongst the shias are the Zaidis and then comes others like Ismaili, Alawi, Nauseri, Bohri etc. Understanding the difference amongst the prominent groups is fundamental to the shia sunni discourse. The Jafari for example have the understanding of 12 Imaam while the Zaidis accept 5 Imaam and the Ismaili Bohras believe in 21 Imaams and the Ismaili Agha Khanis have the 49^th current Imaam. Since Imaam is a fundamental concept amongst Shia groups, it is evident that difference on the Imaams would mean difference in understanding on fundamental issues. 

Second point. The jafaris do not consider Hazrat Ali (R.A) as God or higher or equal to the Prophethood of Muhammad (S.A.W) or that Angel Gabriel made a mistake. They do consider Hazrat Ali (R.A) as an Imaam (Spiritual leader) who is Masoom (pure from any sins) and the heir of the Khilafah after Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W). These concepts do not in anyway contradict the fundamentals of Islam. Considering someone Pure or the heir to the khilafah is a matter of difference of opinion in jurisprudence and no known scholar of repute consider it a basis of takfir (disbelief).

Third point. It is an absolute lie that shias have a quran with 40 chapters. You can go and visit to your shia friend house or a shia mosque and you would find the same quran. There is disagreements on the tafseer aspect of the Quran of Shias and Sunnis and this is a domain in which even many sunnis groups and sahaba had disagreements. 

Fourth point. The kalma of shia and sunnis is the same which is a declaration of faith of all muslims. They do add “Ali(R.A) is a friend of God” . If you ask a serious fiqhi Shia or sunni Scholar that adding this after the kalma or before the kalma is kufr (disbelief), his answer would be in the negative. The Kalma remains the same and adding something which does not contradict the fundamentals of Islam is not a matter of disbelief by any standards and it does not mean that the kalma has been changed.

Fifth point. The most misunderstood issue on both sides is the issue of abusing the Sahaba. It is well accepted by sunni and shia scholars alike that abusing anyone is haram in Islam as per the hadith of the prophet S.A.W saying that “Abusing a muslim is fisq (haram)”. The issue of the Sahaba with the shias is the political issues over several matters i.e. The matter of heir to Khalifa, the battle of Jamal, The Battle of Siffeen, the issue of Karbala, the issue of hazrat Fatima land etc. On the basis of their understanding of ill-treatment, the jafri shia declare disbelief on Hazrat Abu bakr R.A and Hazrat Umar R.A. The learned shia view this matter as a sign of dissatisfaction on such matters however, abusing is still out of question. There is a fatwa of Grand Ayatullah Sistani that it is kufr(disbelief) on those who disrespect bibi Ayesha (R.A). Moreover, it is an absolutely wrong opinion that shia abuse or reject all the sahaba other than ahl-e-bait. Infact Imaam Jafer Sadiq had praised the Sahaba of Rasulullah (S.A.W) in the book Misbah al Shariah as follows:

"Allah (S.W.T) from amongst the Sahaba had selected a group, and showered them with respect, they were successful and the blessed lips of Rasulullah (s) praised them for virtues. You should [likewise] love them, extol their virtues and separate from the people of Bidah as sitting with them leads to one's heart being filled with kufr and hatred".

Just like the badly informed Sunnis and their unacceptable allegations, the badly informed Shias go on and start abusing some of the sahaba publicly which creates chaos amongst the Sunnis who love the companions of Rasolullah (s.a.w) and naturally their emotions are provoked when they hear abusive language about Hazrat Abu bakr R.A. and Hazrat Umar R.A. who have been praised by many hadith from Rasoolullah (s.a.w). This has been the biggest cause of hatred and dispute amongst the sunnis and shias which has given rise to organizations like Sipah sahaba and Lashkar jhangvi and Sipah Mohammad in retaliation.

Sixth point. The issue of praying only 3 namaz and praying with hands un-folded. Shia pray all 5 prayers and they do combine prayers of noon/afternoon and evening/night prayer. This combining of prayers is done during time of hajj and even travelling by many sunni schools of thoughts. Not folding hands during namaz and combining prayers is a matter of jurisprudence based on Imaam Jafer sadiq which is well accepted by the Sunni schools of thought like Imaam Shafi. So once again, this is nothing more than a misconception and lack of knowledge about Islam. 

Seventh point. If you ask a shia that Hazrat Ali (R.A) is all knowing and has the power to help, the learned one would say that he knows what all knowing Allah has informed him through his messenger Prophet S.A.W and he is the wali ullah ( Allah’s friend ) so if he requests from Allah regarding a matter then Allah will bestow that to us. So it is a matter of fact that it is only Allah who is all knowing and all powerful. This concept has no flaw with regards to the fundamentals of Islam. There are some mainstream Brelvi sunni muslims who have the same understanding on this matter with their Spiritual leaders.

Eight point. Regarding the issue of matam, there is disagreement between ayatollah of Iran and Ayatullah of Iraq. There is a clear fatwa by the ayatollah khomeni that pronounces it forbidden to hit yourself with knives and spill blood while the other Ayatullah of Iraq agrees to this practice. Does that make one a kafir (disbeliever)? The Sunni position on this issue is that it is haram to do matam. But to mourn the death of Imaam Hussain R.A. is completely allowed. The disagreement is on the styles of mourning and nothing else.

The above discussion should sum up a lot of the debate that goes on amongst the Sunni Muslims and it should give them a new perspective to re-think about Jafri fiqh in Shia Islam especially from the perspective of takfir (disbelief). This understanding is very important at both ends and a sensible serious dialogue should be started by the scholars of both groups. This would create harmony amongst the two groups and bring them close. We should become a party in spreading this call of unity and should not be infected by the negative propaganda of hatred, lies and misconceptions on both ends.

What has General Raheel Sharif Changed?

This article has been published with some changes at
http://pakteahouse.net/2015/10/25/what-has-general-raheel-sharif-changed/

Imran Khan recently tweeted that the “popularity level of Gen Raheel Sharif is touching skies”. Even though this is true but I am one of the many who are not easily convinced by the superficial displays of patriotism, songs, signboards or statements, which determine ‘popularity’ of political and military “celebrities”. I would rather discuss the serious issues like policies designed to resolve the chronic problems of the country. While Gen Raheel has shown lots of determination, I must say that, I don’t find his approach different from his predecessors (Kiyani and Musharraf ). It is true that due to Gen Raheel’s resolve extortion and target killings have gone down in Karachi. But my reservations are as follows:

Same Drone policy

Let us start with the Drones’ issue. Nothing has been done to restore the air sovereignty of Pakistan that is being continuously invaded by the US. The drone strikes by the Americans continue and perhaps have increased in the recent months. How is it any different from the situation under Gen Kiyani (when more than 300 strikes took place) and Musharraf (when these strikes started).

Dependence on the America

Pakistan does not have an independent foreign policy and sometimes even the domestic policies are influenced by other nations. Secondly, any Chief of Army Staff is close to the Americans. For instance, General Raheel has been awarded the Legion of Merit (LOM) by the U.S. This award is given for exceptionally meritorious conduct in the performance of outstanding services and achievements for the U.S. Similar interest was shown by the Americans in the case of his predecessors From Ayub, Zia, Musharraf, Kiyani etc. Our dependent behavior remains the same.

Extending the American war on terror

After General Musharraf joined the US war on terror as a front line state, there had been several militancy related operations, which destabilized our country immensely. We have had more than 55,000 civilians dead and more than 6,000 army personnel have laid their lives for the war after the Americans invaded Afghanistan. There was just one reported suicide bomb in Pakistan before 9/11 in 1987 and after our alliance with American, we had to pay a huge cost with more than 450 suicide attacks on our soil.

Musharraf started military operations in 2004 in South Waziristan, then Kayani started operation in 2008 in Swat and other regions. General Raheel has been leading operations in North Waziristan and Khyber agencies.DG ISPR Major General Asim Bajwa while briefing at GHQ said, “For the military, there will be no discrimination among Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) groups or Haqqani network, all terror groups are going to be eliminated.”

It is well known that Pakistan’s enemies are the TTP operated groups, and the Haqqanis have never attacked our soil. The Haqqanis – even after several drone strikes on their women and children – did not take up arms against the Pak Army. Have we thought how after Zarb-e-Azab we may be creating more enemies of Pakistani state?

Same policy of heated rhetoric and blame game with India

Complaining to America about Indian involvement and waging a war of words with India. Using Kashmir issue and Indian animosity to whip patriotism; and taking no concrete steps to resolve them. Same policy here.

Continuing the Army operations policy in Balochistan

Last month, at least 13 suspected militants belonging to the BLF were killed in a raid by security forces near Turbat. Balochistan operations continue to take place and atrocities are generally underreported or not discussed at all.

Increasing the Missing persons Issues

On Jan 14, 2015, acccording to media reports, the Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances (CIED) was seized with 1,265 cases as of Dec 31. But the Defence of Human Rights (DHR) claims that the total number of cases of missing persons is 5,149 and 252 of them surfaced in 2014 alone.

Zohra Yusuf, Chairperson HRCP talking about rangers operations in Karachi said: “HRCP has many concerns with regard to due process amid a perceptible rise in suspects’ killings in encounters in Karachi… We cannot stress enough the need for transparency in security operations, and unequivocally state that people being picked up and their whereabouts remaining unknown for days is utterly unacceptable.” Especially after the National Action Plan, the situation of missing person cases has increased. Has our policy changed?

Throwing around 2.8 million people in Camps

How can a country move in the right direction when it displaces its own citizens for every operation that is carried out? FATA was already governed in a terrible manner and now people are suffering from multiple security operations. On 19th March 2015, Minister for States and Frontier Regions Lt General (r) Abdul Qadir Baloch said that the ongoing operation of repatriating Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) to their respective areas would be completed by December 2016. A total of Rs 2.8 million people belonging to seven agencies had to leave their homes due to military operation against militants.

Keeping army relevant as a political actor

The best start of army officials’ involvement was seen during the ‘dharna’ game of 2014; and the Army Chief was presented as the savior of Pakistanis as silly politicians fought with each other. Even though I do not have much hope from the current system and our politicians but a soft army coup is not the answer to our problems. It seems to be a repeat telecast of army involvement when general Kiyani resolved the issue of restoring the former Chief Justice in 2009 when tensions escalated between the PML(N) and the PPP.

On 26 July, 2015, Gen Raheel said: “CPEC and Gwadar Port will be built and developed as one of the most strategic deep sea ports in the region at all costs,” Even though it is a purely civilian initiative and the government of China has made contract with the government of Pakistan. Such statements undermine the civilian setup unnecessarily and increase the powers of the military establishment.

Silencing free journalism

The message is loud and clear to the journalists. You cannot criticize any action of army. You cannot give coverage to the other side of story of the affectees of drones, Zarb-e-Azab, Balochistan issue, IDPs, Karachi operation. You cannot discuss corruption cases within the security agencies. Anyone doing this is a traitor in the homeland. Media is influenced by the intelligence agencies; and the Army public relations department plays a major role these days in shaping public opinion. Such media management is even stronger than the Musharraf or Kiyani eras!

Pushing Legislation to control citizens

Legislation has been pushed which undermines the freedom of civilians and basic human rights. The PPO and the 21st constitutional amendment (under National Action Plan) are clear examples of it. These legal changes make military the judge, the prosecutor and the witness against everyone.

With the passage of the far-reaching Pakistan Protection Act (PPA) 2014, LEAs now have legal cover to enter and search any premises without warrant as well as detain and fire at “enemy aliens/militants” whom they reasonably believe will commit an offence.

What Musharraf started continues. No questions or FIRs on extra judicial killings by the rangers and army operations or the drones. The blame has been placed on the judiciary for freeing terrorists. Instead of strengthening the current judicial structures, the parliament has set up military courts.

And interestingly, if something goes wrong on the security front, it will be the parliamentary PM who will be held accountable.

Supporting militias

If you have heard of the Jamat-ud-Dawa and Jaish-al-Muhammad or Hizb-ul-Mujahideen you would know what I mean. All these groups continue to have offices and banners and billboards and campaigning. This policy has not changed either.

I believe the above points clearly demonstrate that as far as the major policies are concerned, the country has not seen anything new. Patriotic songs, media gimmicks and billboards are of little use given the serious issues faced by the country. And as long as this attitude about major issues like American domination, sacred army, controlled politicians, restricted freedoms, military operations etc continue, we cannot see problems solving in the near future.

Criminalizing Owais Raheel

This article is published with same changes at
http://blogs.tribune.com.pk/story/29777/criminalising-owais-raheel-what-happened-to-innocent-until-proven-guilty/

The news on Wednesday emerged on several news channels regarding the arrest of a Lecturer named Owais Raheel of SZABIST University who is a BE from NED University and an MBA from IBA. The news clip on geo.tv website reports “Another highly educated terror suspect arrested in Karachi’s Clifton” and samaa.tv reports “Karachi professor booked for terror-ties” and arynews.tv reports “IBA graduate turned terrorist arrested in Karachi”.  The CTD has arrested Owais Raheel under section 11EEEE (1) of the Anti-Terrorism Act which would investigate the charges against him for at-least 3 months and then decide in the court of Law for being guilty of the alleged crime or not. 

Let us step back and analyze these BREAKING NEWS stories in front of a common man. To him, this person is a Terrorist even though nothing is proved in the court of Law. The Media has defamed him with the utmost negligence just to gain ranking in the news business and just to make the news more astonishing. Since by viewing the news details, I saw that the only thing recovered from him were pamphlets and his alleged involvement in campaigning for Hizb-ut-tahrir. Interestingly, he was not found killing people, or carrying guns or grenades, or advocating sectarian hatred or involved in any terrorism related activity. Let us look at the group with whom he is claimed to be associated i.e. HuT. The group believes in an intellectual and political struggle to revive the Ottomon style Caliphate all across the Muslim word. Several of their members have been arrested earlier for their radical views regarding the existing democratic structure and the political and military leadership of Pakistan. Their members are generally found to be highly educated and they openly condemn the activities of TTP and ISIS all across the world and consider Militant struggle as Haram (forbidden). Even SSP Amir Farooqi of the CTD said on the arrest of Owais Raheel that “We have not yet found their history of terrorism”. The interviews of his students by Tribune revealed that he was a gentleman, really helpful, extremely competent in his field and never imposed his ideas.  Considering this background, I believe that Owais Raheel might be set free soon enough because it is purely legal to have political and intellectual discussions and struggle in Pakistan.

But for the common man, He is a bloody terrorist who kills kids and bombs mosques and kill shias etc because the media has FRAMED the news in that direction. He has been shown connected somehow with the case of Saad Aziz and Safoora attacks and sheeba ahmed on a prime TV show. It shows that people are been prosecuted without evidences. Owais Raheel’s reputation has been defamed and now would have to justify himself for not being a criminal or a terrorist or killing people. This is just one example of how media has literally abused viewership power to discredit people and parties. If one ponders on the news of Drone strikes and strikes by our Air force, you would be stunned to hear that “30 or so suspected terrorists killed” or the news of Rangers operations that “10 or so suspected TTP terrorists killed”. I mean who is a suspected Terrorist? There is a clear universally accepted principle that says “Innocent until proven guilty”. But in Pakistan, It is the other way around. How can you kill a person who is suspected of a crime? How can u defame a person who is suspected to be something or someone? If Owais Raheel is not proven guilty then who would be guilty of defaming and destroying his family reputation and his career?

To add to all this is the misery faced by the families of such people and the way concerned authorities deal with them. Owais Raheel according to the family was missing since last month, they even posted a petition in court and did press conference for him earlier but they were denied any information. The CTD reports that they picked Owais on Tuesday, 6th October, 2015. Even the ZABIST administration told that he was suspended for missing classes without notice last month. Is this how we treat our citizens? Zohra Yusuf, Chairperson HRCP talking about operations in Karachi Rightly pointed out that “HRCP has many concerns with regard to due process amid a perceptible rise in suspects’ killings in encounters in Karachi, as is obvious from official figures also. We cannot stress enough the need for transparency in security operations, and unequivocally state that people being picked up and their whereabouts remaining unknown for days is utterly unacceptable.”

You kill people on suspected grounds, you defame people on suspected grounds, you arrest people on suspicion and make them terror linked on the basis of suspicion. All this is without evidence and the fruits of the National Action Plan that is being implemented or the Pakistan Protection Ordinance or the Anti terrorism Act etc. These things are a clear violation of Human rights and must clearly be accounted. Ironically, the media had been irresponsibly consistent in pushing this narrative along with the state. Whether it be in the case of MQM or kachi abadis in Islamabad, or drone strikes or army operations or Karachi operations or baloch operations. The Media needs to become a strong pillar of the state to keep it on the right track and stop portraying people and parties as criminals before proven. Let the courts decide this.