June 2010?s B-side
June 2010′s B-side has two central themes. The first is a focus on Islam and its status in the Islamic State of Pakistan thanks to an excellent article by Ayaz Amir. The second focus on Afghanistan, looks at the prospects of the approaching endgame via an open letter written by David Miliband to General David Petreus. Huma Yusuf’s article looks at Afghanistan’s new riches and its geopolitical implications amidst the fear of a new ’great game’, fun and games indeed. June 2010′s B-side contents include:
- The Blasphemy Around Us by AYAZ AMIR
- How to End the War in Afghanistan by DAVID MILIBAND
- Afghanistan’s New Riches by HUMA YUSUF
The first article is written by one of my favourite columnists, the one and only Ayaz Amir.
The Blasphemy Around Us by Ayaz Amir
If Islam stands for anything, it is for a just society, free from want and oppression. There is, thus, in Islam no blasphemy greater than a child dying of hunger, a child begging for bread, a woman drowning herself and her children, as has frequently happened in the Islamic Republic, because the burden of life was too much for her, a man throwing himself before an onrushing train because of poverty.
We are moved by these things, but only up to a point. The holy fathers, the registered doctors of the faith, self-appointed arbiters of right and wrong in the Islamic Republic, can be counted upon to take out processions and raise their banners, not to speak of their voices, in defence of the faith, even when it is not quite clear what is imperilled or what is at stake. But when was the last time anyone heard of a procession, foaming at the mouth, taken out against hunger and deprivation?
All of Islam, the entire corpus of Islamic thought, as I have mentioned many a time, can be boiled down to that one cry of the Caliph Omar, that he, the Commander of the Faithful, would be called to account on the Day of Judgment if a dog is hungry by the banks of the Euphrates. Not, mark you, a child or a man hungry by the banks of the Euphrates, but a dog. This, and not the anger, the fire and brimstone pouring forth from over-pitched loudspeakers, is the Islamic ideal.
But who cares for the substance of Islam? We talk of subverting the Constitution. More than any constitution, it is our faith whose truth we have subverted. In no other Islamic country on earth, with the exception perhaps of Saudi Arabia, is more lip-service paid to Islam. We can do nothing without invoking the name of Islam, start nothing without reciting from the Quran. Yet, to look at our collective life–a byword for corruption and all the ills that the human mind can imagine–is to get the impression that no society is more committed to the vice of doublespeak than ours.
Hypocrisy as pervasive as this should lead to a measure of tolerance, some indulgence for the weaknesses of others and our own. But our hypocrisy is of a special kind, enclosed in a straitjacket of self-righteousness. We live not in a state of denial. That would be putting it mildly, because denial is an escape from reality. We have created a reality of our own. Oblivious of our iron begging bowl, oblivious of the fact that, but for the largesse of, if not infidels at least of non-Muslims, we would be a broke nation, we really subscribe to the fiction that we are a fortress of Islam.
Not only that, but that Pakistan was created for a special purpose, to fulfil a divine mission. I am not joking. Serious people subscribe to such uplifting thoughts. The army chief, Gen Ashfaq Kayani, whom one would otherwise take to be a rational person, in a sombre moment declared that Pakistan was a fortress of Islam.
If this is the sturdiest fortress Islam has then Islam, truly speaking, is in mortal peril. And the foam-at-the-mouth brigade, led by our assorted holy fathers, now scattered in more denominations and factions than a reasonably smart mind can figure out, are perhaps right to come out, in all their unsuppressed anger, in defence of the faith.
Our army, not all of NATO’s might, is the lynchpin of America’s war in Afghanistan. You might suppose this would give us some leverage. Yet it is a measure of our beleaguered circumstances that, although we try to put up a brave face, we end up succumbing to American pressure. The operations the army ends up launching are those which America wants.
Why is it that the US seems to have us on a leash? Something seriously wrong with the fortress of Islam and its army dedicated to jihad in the name of Allah –the battle slogan bestowed on the army by Gen Zia — should this really be the case?
Are standards of justice in the Islamic Republic the same for everyone? Pakistan exists at several levels: for the ultra-privileged, the privileged, the semi-privileged, and, through several other gradations, down to the very bottom of the social heap where life can be very tough. For a country that calls itself an Islamic Republic this is blasphemy. Different schools for different people is blasphemy. Inequality of all kinds is blasphemy. Why do we close our eyes to these things? Why is our anger so selective? Why isn’t it excited by the misery, wretchedness and squalor lying all around us?
True, we aren’t the only luckless nation or country on earth. Many others are in worse circumstances than us. There is also much we can be grateful for. But other countries, even the worst, do not call themselves fortresses of Islam or Christendom. They do not wear, in and out of season, the masks of self-righteous anger that we do. We have enough real grievances to redress. Our real problems are mounting, not dissolving. Why, then, must we go looking for grievances? Why must we be perpetually on a voyage of exploration looking for slights even when anything perceived as a slight was never intended as one?
Why can’t we be more assured of our faith and our beliefs? Why must we think that unless we are always ready with spear and fireball our faith will be under threat? This doesn’t say much for our self-confidence or the trust that we place in our beliefs.
Islam existed for 800 years in Hindustan and it was never in danger. We created a state in the name of Islam just 63 years ago and Islam has been in danger ever since. Why can’t we let go a bit? If Islam has been around for 1,400 years, it is not because of us or Osama bin Laden but because of its intrinsic strength. It is not a fragile vessel that we should always be rushing to its defence. In any event, the best defence of Islam is the creation of a just society, a society attuned to the understanding that the best homage to the All-knowing and the Almighty is the pursuit of knowledge and learning, and that the highest good is a level playing field.
Turkey (then the Ottoman Empire) was as Islamic in 1914 as it is now. But it was the Sick Man of Europe then and the very name Turk was an expression of abuse. Turkey speaks with a stronger voice today. Why? Because it has come of age and has done well by itself. Confidence is a gift of achievement and will come only when we turn from slaying imaginary dragons to getting down to solving our all-too-real problems.
Imagine the Lahore High Court directing the ministry of foreign affairs to move a resolution regarding defamation in the UN General Assembly. Are we living in the real world?
Every voyage of discovery, every attempt to clasp the moon in the Ninth Heaven and seize turtles deep down in the Five Seas, every path-breaking journey in the realm of knowledge has been undertaken by the human mind unfettered, the mind liberated of its chains, the mind unblocked by fear or superstition. That is the one prerequisite without which no advance is possible.
Religions are many, and more power to them. The light of knowledge is one and indivisible. Down the centuries its burning flame has passed from hand to hand, kept in trust, even if unknowingly, for all of humanity by different civilisations: Phoenician, Assyrian, Egyptian, Chinese, Greek, Muslim, Christian, and so on. Salvation in this world has come only to those whose paths have been illumined by this light.
But for us to be able to reach out for this torch requires a certain cast of mind, a certain temper of the soul. As our frequent rages all too vividly testify, we have yet to arrive at that stage. Will we ever be there? Will we even begin the journey? Our eternal preoccupation with chimeras of our own making suggests that we are still a long way off from the starting point.
Published in The News
WASIM VIEW-Ayaz Amir’s article is pure class. In it Amir reminds Pakistanis and Muslims more widely of the glorious Islamic traditions and heritage which we have as individuals and as a collective betrayed. Amir is right in declaring that all of Islam can be summarised in the example of Hazrat Umar (RA) and I must quote Amir entirely:
‘All of Islam, the entire corpus of Islamic thought, as I have mentioned many a time, can be boiled down to that one cry of the Caliph Omar, that he, the Commander of the Faithful, would be called to account on the Day of Judgment if a dog is hungry by the banks of the Euphrates. Not, mark you, a child or a man hungry by the banks of the Euphrates, but a dog. This, and not the anger, the fire and brimstone pouring forth from over-pitched loudspeakers, is the Islamic ideal’
On blasphemy, Amir has drawn attention to the real and daily blasphemy we see each day in Pakistan in the poverty of the masses and the pilferage of the ruling elite. The Ahmadi issue is small talk compared to the big picture of a Pakistan, that has betrayed its Islamic foundations and thus is at unease with itself and her people.
Amir’s other points in the article are the regular rants of the left against Pakistan as an fortress of Islam and are cheap shot points made easier given the hijacking of Pakistan as an Islamic state by the mullahs who opposed its very creation. The sad truth is that the liberal or moderate Pakistani fears the Islamic state owing to Zia’s so-called Islam while the rest of Pakistan dreams of a true Islamic state.
Both sleep uneasy bemoaning their today and tomorrow forgetting the yesterday of Hazrat Umar (RA) was our yesterday too, indeed it was that yesterday that Allama Iqbal and the Quaid-e-Azam wanted to replicate in Pakistan, and that dream lives on.
The second article is the first of two that focuses on Afghanistan. The article is an open letter written by David Miliband the former British Foreign Secterary written to General David Petreus, and in it Miliband looks at Afghanistan’s endgame.
How to End the War in Afghanistan by David Miliband
Dear David Petraeus,
You and I both know the Afghan mission is at a decisive moment. Stanley McChrystal was a remarkable commander who had the fierce loyalty of the men and women under his command. He brought rigour and drive as well as compassion to the mission in Afghanistan. President Obama’s decisive action to put you in charge shows the urgency and importance that the President rightly attaches to this mission. There is now a race against time to persuade the Afghan people that the correct strategy is in place and show our own people it can succeed.
The first time we met, you told me there is no way to kill your way to victory in a counter insurgency. As we have discussed, the purpose of military effort and civilian improvement is to create the conditions for political settlement. The battle for power is fought in the minds of the local population, insurgents and western publics.
Better Afghan Security Forces are necessary but not enough. Better schooling and economic opportunities are vital for the loyalty of the Afghan people. But none of them are durable or possible without a political settlement. We need the tribes inside the system, al qaeda outside, and the neighbours onside. The process required is therefore two-pronged – national and regional.
First, include the excluded. Within Afghanistan, a political settlement needs arrangements, whether formal or informal, to ensure that the legitimate tribal, ethnic, and other groups that feel excluded from the post-Bonn political settlement are given a real stake in the political process and are able to compete for political representation. A peace settlement must include the vanquished as well as the victors. All of this would encourage Afghans to play a part in building stability and security so that and this is a key objective of many of the insurgents the international forces will be able to withdraw from combat, initially into a training and support role, and then altogether.
Second, go local. The provincial and district governors and their associated assemblies of elders should be given new governing powers, so they have the confidence, competence, and capacity to govern in the best interests of those they represent. Recruiting the right people for these jobs is essential and in view of the challenges of upholding justice and the rule of law, the police chief and local magistrates are equally important.
Third, a new legislative process should be established not necessarily involving constitutional change between President and parliament, in order to give parliamentarians a real stake in the success of the political settlement.
Fourth, underpinning all this must be a more concerted effort to prevent and reduce the corruption that corrodes trust. President Karzai’s promises to tackle the culture of impunity and to establish a new anti-corruption unit are only a start.
Regionally, all of Afghanistan’s neighbors and the key regional powers must recognise two simple facts: no country in the region, let alone the international community, will again allow Afghanistan to be dominated, or used as a strategic asset, by a neighboring state; and the status quo in Afghanistan is damaging to all. Crime, drugs, terrorism, and refugees spill across its borders when Afghanistan’s great mineral wealth and agricultural land should instead be of benefit to the region.
There will be no settlement in Afghanistan without Pakistan’s involvement, but India, Russia, Turkey, and China are also key. Moreover, the Iranian regime whose nuclear policies have flouted the UN and that has a record of attempting to destabilize its neighbors must acknowledge that the best way to protect its investments or promote the interests of Afghans that share its Shia faith is to work to promote peace, not undermine it.
I know there is an argument over when the time is right to go down the political track, but in truth it has already begun. It is shaped and reshaped every day in the minds of the people. The job of the Afghan government, with our strong support, should be to define a political endgame that creates a stake for all those willing to live within the Afghan constitution – and then march towards it.
You have said yourself that 70 to 80 per cent of the insurgency are not ideologically linked to al-Qaeda. Engagement with those who have been involved in attacks is difficult. But allowing space for discussion to bring people from the insurgency into Afghan society, removing the violence, is not appeasement. It is exactly what we want to achieve: the end of the war, with the sustainable capacity in the country to prevent its restart.
Now is a time for determination but also clarity. We are counting on you.
Yours,
David
Published in The Telegraph
WASIM VIEW- David Miliband’s open letter is the first signal that Britian and the West more widely are moving towards some form of an endgame in Afghanistan. Miliband is of course right in calling for the ‘inclusion of the excluded’ which obviously is a codeword for bringing to the table of peace the Taliban, the Haqqani group and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar.
Miliband is right too in supporting Pakistan’s central role in bringing peace to Afghanistan and the wider region, however he overstates the role of India, China, Turkey and Iran all of whom cannot make or break Afghanistan like Pakistan can and has in the past as we have found to our collective cost a la Pakistan’s strategic depth scorched earth policy.
David Miliband is right in asking for a political settlement with the Taliban and other excluded but indigenous groups given they control most of the country and has openly called for an endgame in Afghanistan, I support him in that endeavour, the Afghanistan endgame must end, and the sooner the better.
The final article too looks at Afghanistan in particular its vast mineral reserves. the focus is not on an endgame but rather the continuing ’great game’.
Afghanistan’s New Riches by Huma Yusuf
Nine hundred and eight billion dollars. That is the price tag a report issued by the Pentagon and US Geological Survey put on Afghanistan’s untapped mineral wealth some days ago.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s spokesman described the valuation as “the best news we have had over many years”. But for Pakistan, the presence of vast reserves of iron, copper, cobalt, gold and lithium across the Durand Line may only spell more trouble.
Historically, the discovery of mineral wealth leads to greater political instability. Writing in Bloomberg’s Businessweek, Amity Shlaes points to Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Russia and Sierra Leone as examples of places where the unexpected discovery of oil or minerals led to rampant corruption, gang violence, military takeovers and worse. The only way for such resources to lead to posterity, argues Shlaes, is for nations to have clear, protected property rights. These, however, will be hard to come by in Afghanistan, where basic governance remains a pipe dream.
In this context, the dollar value assigned to Afghanistan’s mineral resources could prove to be a curse, rather than a blessing. Analysts expect the Taliban to put up a stronger fight to retain control of areas believed to be mineral-rich. Moreover, Afghan tribes, the government in Kabul and foreign mining companies will also be vying for their share of the minerals. A consequent increase in turf wars, violence and political instability will inevitably prolong Pakistan’s security problems.
More fighting in Afghanistan means Pakistan’s ‘jihadi factory’ — training camps, recruitment centres, financing through kidnapping and other crime — will have renewed impetus. Rhetoric that calls for protecting ‘Muslim’ wealth from western colonisers will no doubt spur recruitment. Unemployed young men on both sides of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border will also readily fight on behalf of different camps in the hope of getting rich quick by procuring some of the promised wealth.
Moreover, the US Geological Survey’s findings show that mineral deposits are present along the border with Pakistan. This will raise the question of whether the resources extend into Fata and other areas, including Balochistan. Even without the benefit of an international survey, one can imagine Baloch nationalist groups and Fata-based tribes stepping up their resistance to state incursions in an attempt to control the wealth their lands might yield. Given Pakistan’s terrible record of distributing revenue from natural resources fairly, such resistance would not be uncalled for; it would, however, further weaken the state.
In the short term, the announcement of mineral wealth in Afghanistan will fuel conspiracy theories about US plans for the region, thereby further destabilising Pakistan’s political infrastructure, which currently runs on aid dollars. The fact is, the initial geological survey of Afghanistan was completed by the US in 2007, but its findings were not publicised then.
This delay has led to theories that the media’s celebration of Afghanistan’s newfound mineral wealth is a way for Washington to justify ongoing troop presence in the region. Vast mineral wealth is being seen as the ‘war booty’ that has driven US involvement in Afghanistan for almost a decade now. If taken up by the religious rightwing in Pakistan, this conspiracy theory would fan anti-US feelings.
In the longer term, the increased confidence of an economically sound Afghanistan would make the Pakistan Army more rigid in its dependence on ‘strategic assets’ to ensure security. Here’s why: many Afghans are fed up of Pakistan meddling in their country’s affairs and allegedly propping up the Taliban. They are impatient with Karzai, who has shown a willingness to engage with Pakistan in preparing for a post-US-withdrawal Afghanistan. The recent resignations of the Afghan interior minister and intelligence chief indicate that frustration with Islamabad and mistrust of its goals are prevalent at even the highest levels.
An Afghanistan that is enjoying a minerals-driven economic boom, however, would be more assertive in demanding national and political sovereignty. There would be less tolerance for the Pakistan Army’s need to keep a handle on developments in Kabul as a way to ensure strategic depth. Indeed, Islamabad could quickly find itself sidelined.
A mining boom in Afghanistan could also make the Pakistan Army’s concerns about encirclement seem more real. Interestingly, the new Afghan minister for mines was in India, soliciting bids for the auction of an iron deposit estimated to be worth $5bn, when the Pentagon report hit international headlines. Days later, CNBC reported that Afghanistan had invited Indian companies to prospect for and extract minerals. The Indian mines minister has also announced that Afghan geologists would visit India in July for training and to establish avenues for Indo-Afghan cooperation in this field.
Kabul’s desire for Indian involvement in its mineral industry is primarily a way to offset Chinese control of Afghan resources. Ever since China signed a $3bn deal to mine copper in Logar province, Kabul and Washington have worried that Beijing could dominate investments in Afghanistan’s mineral wealth. But the Pakistan Army will not entertain the dynamics of this great game, and instead see Indian investments in Afghanistan as a way to undermine Pakistan’s involvement in that country.
In such a scenario, the army would certainly redouble its efforts to maintain ‘strategic assets’ that could be deployed against India as well as a hostile Afghanistan. In other words, Afghanistan’s future economic prosperity could reiterate Pakistan’s reputation for state-sponsored terrorism and ‘double games’, an outcome that would irreparably damage Pakistan’s economic and diplomatic prospects on the world stage.
What one should hope for instead is an economically viable, and thus stable, Afghanistan which has prospered thanks to Indian investment in mining and Pakistani investment in overall infrastructure (roads, railroads, buildings). Such regional economic cooperation is the key to long-term political stability and security.
Published in Dawn
WASIM VIEW- Forever the bearer of bad news, Afghanistan is for once at the centre of some good news owing to the discovery of its vast mineral resources. Yusuf’s tiemly article looks at this good news within a wider political and geopolitical context and many of her observations deserve comment. On the political field, it is obvious as the night follows day that the Afghan power elites will be motivated by the $1 trillion dollar prize that awaits them should they use the mineral resources correctly.
The $1 trillion dollar prize however will be contested by the present leadership led by Karzai who will have to take on the Taliban who already control most of Afghanistan including many areas where the mineral resources are speculated to lay. Afghanistan’s numerous and notorious druglords and warlords sadly cannot be forgotten for they too will claim a share in the booty, and so history will repeat itself so expect more blood and tears from Kabul to Kandahar with an Afghanistan facing yet more internal strife as one and all compete to secure the prize of $1 trillion dollars.
Yusuf is rignt to warn of the dawn of a new ‘great game’ in the region and is right in highlighting the geopolitical impact of the mineral find in terms of Pakistan-India tensions given India’s desire to help Afghanistan secure its mineral resources. Pakistan is unlikely to stand idle in this new great game especially given the fact that the mineral riches have been found near the Pakistan border and could also be found located in FATA and Balochistan.
For Pakistan, a prosperous and stable Afghanistan remains a pipe dream irrespective of the mineral riches given Pakistan’s history with the Afghan state and its psyche. Turmoil seems to be never far away in Afghanistan and thus I fear that the mineral riches will serve as a new incentive for the spilling of blood and guts in Afghanistan and the wider region. The colonial policy of divide and rule is continuing no doubt given that Afghanistan’s mineral resources were found not in recent weeks as reported but were located in a US Geological Survey in 2007.
One is left to marvel at the US government who have used what is old but good news to motivate NATO to stay the course and so share the Afghan booty just as NATO is gettting a hammering. At the same time the mineral resources booty will serve to motivate many Afghans to a ruthless pursuit of profit pitting Afghan versus Afghan and is remniscient is it not of a divide and rule policy brought to the region by the colonialists many decades ago.
