http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pa... Gojra and education By Zubeida Mustafa Wednesday, 12 Aug, 2009 | 09:35 AM PST |      A man returns to find his house destroyed in Gojra. —Reuters Media Gallery The future of Pakistan celebrates its past AUDIO SLIDESHOW Pakistani women rise up Talking to a Dawn panel several years ago, Asghar Ali Engineer, head of the Centre for Study of Society and Secularism, Mumbai, had commented that every communal riot in India that he had investigated was found to be rooted in economic factors. Invariably the majority community attacking a minority wanted to undermine it to gain an unfair economic advantage. But the whole incident was garbed in communal terms. We will not know the underlying reasons for the horrendous event in Gojra until the episode is investigated from that point of view. HRCP’s findings confirm that the violence was premeditated as is tradionally the pattern in cases of seemingly mindless killings. But there is usually a method to the madness. That within the span of a few hours seven Christians should have been consumed literally by fires born of communal hatred and 70 or so of their homes burnt down is most telling. What, however, also emerges from the terrible events in Gojra — and also Sangla Hill in 2005 and Shantinagar in 1997 — is how very easy it is for the perpetrators of such crimes to incite people in the name of religion. Thus they can veil their ulterior motives by making an incident appear as an emotional reaction in the face of a provocation, that could well have been concocted. It is worrying that popular passions can be inflamed at the drop of a hat. A rational mindset and the ability to reason created by good education can go a long way towards developing interfaith harmony, tolerance and understanding of other religions. The week Gojra happened, this paper carried another report that seemingly had no relevance to the tragedy that followed. But the connection between the two was not lost on those who have observed closely the obscurantist proclivity in our national psyche and its close _link_ with the education we impart to our children. It was reported that the Pakistan Coalition for Education, a network of civil society organisations and individuals, had expressed its strong disapproval of the government’s failure to expedite the announcement of the new education policy that has been in the works for several years. A visibly upset Kamleshwer Lohana, PCE’s member from Sindh, had remarked cynically, ‘The education policy is not a priority for the present government. This policy will be applicable only to the poor people — those who are dependent on government educational institutions.’ Since the elite control the government they are not concerned. This is exactly how Javed Hassan Aly, the author of the 2007 White Paper on education also felt. He added, ‘The government, presently under clouds of public scrutiny, is shy of tackling what it may consider contentious issues. The elite and the for-profit private sector are happy with the status quo which allows them to entrench themselves more securely.’ Why should they want a new policy? Now it seems the delay had an added reason behind it. A revised policy has now been posted on the ministry of education’s website and is to be presented to the cabinet. Compare the draft rejected by the cabinet earlier and the present document. You will discover a new chapter _title_d ‘Islamic Education: Duty of the Society and the State’. The earlier draft had recognised explicitly the need for educational interventions to be _base_d on the core value of Islam as identified by the constitution’s chapter on principles of state policy. Apparently that was not found to be adequate. Four extra pages now spell out in detail the Islamic contents of the prescribed courses when earlier a paragraph had sufficed to capture the Islamic spirit to be injected into education in Pakistan. The emphasis on religion in the new draft is overly exaggerated. It is a forewarning that we can expect to see more of the earlier approach that has been responsible for creating the mindset that resulted in Gojra. Numerous surveys have confirmed that. In fact, it is now conceded that the curricula and textbooks in the regular school system have caused more pervasive damage than the madressahs have, given the small numbers which attend them. The policy draft with specific reference to NEP 1998-2010 speaks of an ‘integrated education system in which Islamic values, principles and _object_ives are reflected in the syllabuses of all the disciplines in general’. It would be pertinent to recall here that NEP 1998-2010 spoke of evolving ‘an integrated system of national education by bringing deeni madaris and modern schools closer to each stream in curriculum and the contents of education’. This was to be achieved by introducing Nazira Quran as a compulsory component. How all this translates into practice for the religious minorities is evident from the eye-opening observations made by Prof Anjum Paul, chairman Pakistan Minorities Teachers Association, on the biases against his community. He analysed 12 Urdu language textbooks for class I-XII, and ‘found 235 chapters and poems out of 409 having a strong Islamic orientation’. He identifies the biases and discrimination against the religious minorities of Pakistan in textbooks, educational institutions and admission processes. Take the case of Muslim students being awarded 20 marks for nazra (reciting the Quran by heart). This makes it difficult for the minorities to compete for seats in higher education. Even the textbooks for ethics (a subject introduced a few years ago in lieu of Islamiat for religious minorities) are written by Muslims who obviously cannot identify with the teachings of other religions resulting in bias against Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, Zoroastrians and others. This has failed to create social and inter-faith harmony, Prof Paul says. Recently compulsory training courses for teachers in subjects including qirat were announced. The PMTA regards this as discrimination against teachers from minority communities. We may repeat ad nauseam the Quaid’s proclamation on ‘religion or caste or creed’ having nothing to do with the ‘business of the state’, but if we continue to have education policies that preach religious hatred, many more Gojras can be expected. ...and I am Sid Harth

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/wo... US panel says India fails to protect minorities Thursday, 13 Aug, 2009 | 06:17 PM PST |  Former Gujarat state minister Maya Kodnani, center wearing yellow sari, accused of leading mobs that attacked Muslims during some of the country's worst religious riots, comes out of a Metropolitan court in Ahmadabad. -AP File Photo World UN report slams violation of Indian minorities’ rights  NEW DELHI: A US panel on religious freedoms has placed India on its watch list of countries where such freedoms are at risk, noting that there has been a 'disturbing increase' in violence against minorities in the South Asian country. The US Commission on International Religious Freedom, an independent congressionally mandated panel that provides recommendations to the government, said in a statement Wednesday that India's response to attacks on Christians in the eastern state of Orissa in 2008 and against Muslims in western Gujarat state in 2002 was 'largely inadequate.' The panel had recommended that India be placed on the more serious 'countries of particular concern' list after the 2002 riots, but it was removed in 2005. In Orissa's Kandhamal district, widespread trouble began in late August last year after the killing of Swami Laxmanananda Saraswati, a hard-line Hindu leader who advocated that Christian converts return to Hinduism. Police blamed local Maoist guerrillas for the killing, but Hindu militants quickly turned on local Christians and the rampages left at least 40 people dead, thousands homeless and dozen of churches destroyed. In Gujarat about 1,000 people, most of them Muslims, were killed when Hindu mobs rampaged through Muslim neighborhoods, towns and villages in the state from February to April 2002. The riots were triggered by a fire that killed 60 passengers on a train packed with Hindu pilgrims. The religious violence was among India's worst since its independence from Britain in 1947. The Gujarat state government is controlled by Hindu nationalists of the Bharatiya Janata Party who have been accused of not doing enough to stop the violence and at times stoking it. Officials there, however, said they did everything they could to quell the rioting. 'In both Orissa and Gujarat, court convictions have been infrequent, perpetrators rarely brought to justice and thousands of people remain displaced,' the statement said. There was no immediate response from the Indian government. Countries are placed on the watch list or the more serious 'countries of particular concern' list because their governments either discriminate against people for religious reasons or are unwilling or unable to stop religious violence by their citizens. The other countries currently on the list are Afghanistan, Belarus, Cuba, Egypt, Indonesia, Laos, the Russian Federation, Somalia, Tajikistan, Turkey, and Venezuela. The statement added that the panel issues its annual report on religious freedom in May and this year's India chapter was delayed because the Indian government refused to give visas to panel members. - AP ...and I am Sid Harth

http://rethinkingislam-sultanshahin.blogspot.com/2009/08/babri-masjid... Rethinking Islam Thursday, August 13, 2009 Babri masjid dispute: Finding a solution Islam and Politics 10 Feb 2009, NewAgeIslam.Com That any temple built at Ayodhya will have been built on the blood of so many innocent lives, and by imperilling so many moral and constitutional principles, ought to be a matter of shame for most Hindus who care about Ram. This is an issue on which there is unlikely to be any settlement that appears just, and there are no guarantees that even a settlement will lay many of the murderous edges of Indian politics to rest. But it will take a divisive issue off the agenda and potentially transform our politics. There is no option other than to try. As a society we long gave up on justice. At the present conjuncture, we can only hope that we will at least opt for prudence.

http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2009/08/14/pakistaniat-the-crisis-of... Pakistaniat : The Crisis of Identity Bradistan Calling What can I give to Pakistan as a present on its 62nd Birthday, What else than an article on its chequered history and identity. Bertrand Russell famously said,” There are three great civilisations in East i.e. India, China and Islam”. Pakistan is blessed to be located at the crossroads of all these great civilisations. In my humble opinion this is the biggest strength of Pakistani identity. Celebrating the T20 victory in Bradfor,I left my intellectual hat at home and donned the green flag to go on the street and celebrate with the Bradistan boyz and girlz, not that I consider myself a “flag waving nationalist”. My loyalties might be a bit shaky but I would never dream of waving a tricolour of Republic of India. It is a different story when it comes to patriotic movies like “Baghat Singh” or “Mother India”, my eyes fill with tears of pride. I don’t follow Pakistan cricket team fanatically; I am well past my youth days of 1992 world cup victory. I still remember how the Pakistanis, all over the world, spontaneously came out on the streets singing dancing, waving their flags, congratulating and hugging strangers. It was similar story this time as well and all major motorways in and out of Bradford were blocked, there were long queues in front of sweet shops and police had to restrain some hot-headed youth who insist on sitting on the roofs of their cars while waving the flags, girls with Pakistanis T-shirts with loud anthems on their car stereos.   These scenes were repeated across Bradford, Birmingham, Manchester and London.   Obviously the rightwing mullah brigade (made in Saudi Arabian clone factory) does not like Pakistanis singing and dancing on the street in sinful jubilation. In itself winning a minor or major sports tournament cannot, by any stretch of imagination, be termed a national achievement. Do we really go over the top in our celebrations? probably yes, but the Pakistanis from the Jackson Heights in New York city to the Afro-Baluch slums of Lyari in Karachi and from Chinese border in the north to the deserts of Punjab and Sindh felt a real sense of excitement after continuous bad news of terrorist attacks, lack of electricity, breakdown of governance and the economic and social crises in Pakistan. Foreign governments and research analysts continuously rank Pakistan in the category of at risk of becoming a failed state. These analyses are probably too far fetched if not completely inaccurate. Pakistan is facing a Population explosion of 180 million people, but Pakistan is also bursting with energy and talent. Pakistani scientists, doctors and professors are among the best in the world. It would probably be irresponsible to rank Pakistan with countries like Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, Sudan or Zimbabwe. Pakistan is fighting a war for its survival against the Islamic terrorists. Pakistan was envisaged as a country for Muslims by liberal Muslim elite of India, not an Islamic theocracy. Pakistan, at its birth, had the vitality and diversity of a multiethnic multilingual and multi cultural country. Unfortunately rightwing pan-Islamic ideologues like Maududi, To- fail Mohammed and their protégé Islamist dictator Zia conspired to sell the soul of Pakistan to the devilish terrorist from Middle East. Despite its religious and cultural pluralism, Pakistan suffers an identity crisis. The founder of Pakistan Mr. Jinnah articulated his vision for the constitutional rights of all citizens irrespective of their religion, race or background, in a speech to legislative assembly on the eve of independence. But the Islamists want to turn Pakistan into a colonial outpost of puritanical Saudi Arabia. Even Baluch separatists are more democratic and secular than the so called champions of “two nation Hindu-Muslim ideology” of Pakistan.  Recently Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan has tried to _link_ the Pakistani identity to Indus Valley Civilisation, which prospered the areas of current Pakistan 5000 years ago. But can a vision from past heal the fault lines in the current Pakistani identity, possible but highly unlikely. Pakistan is a reality which the sceptics of partition of India cannot simply wish away. Pakistani identity is a fluid and dynamic paradigm and religion alone cannot provide the basis of a modern nation state. The Islamist tried to wipe out the colourful mosaic of songs and culture through imposition of their mono-chrome Islamic culture on TV, newspapers, magazines, painters and performing arts. World famous Pakistani historian and anthropologist late Ahmed H. Dani described, Pakistan’s landscape and culture as many countries rolled into one; Northern Areas are Central Asian Switzerland , Frontier is Afghani, Punjab and upper Sindh are North Indian and Baluchistan and lower Sindh are Middle Eastern. Up until 2004, Pakistan used to have half a million European and American tourists every year. The Himalayan valleys in Northern Areas, The Kite Runner festival of “Basant” in the ancient and  walled inner city of Lahore(capital of North Indian culture), cultural and religious tourism for Sikh and Hindu pilgrims are still as good as any in the world. Pakistan has to showcase the Indus Valley and Ghandhara Buddhist civilizations, Basant festival, performing arts festival, truck art, chicken-Tikka Masaala Mughal cuisine, Buddhist, Hindu and Sikh pilgrimage places to new markets.Festivals at Shiv Mandir in Katas Raj and Kali Mandir in Hinglaj Balouchistan can bring Non-resident Indians(sikhs especially) NRIs from Europe and America. Its high time Indians are allowed free access to Pakistani destinations. In today’s Pakistan, despite the terrorism the media is free but there are certain “red lines”, which no one dares to cross. Pakistan national broadcasters TV and radio try to revive the art and culture through works of great writers and thinkers like Faiz, Faraz, Parveen shaker,S H Manto, Ahmed Nadeem Qasmi,Ibn Insha and painters like Guljee ,Sadqeen and A R  Chughtai. Recently International bestsellers of Pakistani writers have made waves in media.  Arguably, the art and the literature are limited to the elite. Unfortunately, the local languages and culture is in decline due to global satellite TV entertainment. Sufi Islam (with its colourful religious ceremonies) has inspired singers like Nusrat Fateh Ali, Junoon and Shafqat Amanat Ali to project a soft image of Pakistan to world wide audiences. Sufi saints’ folklore and romantic folktales of Heer-Ranja(Punjab), Sassi-Pannu (Baluch), Saiful –Maluk(Kashmir/Hazara) and Umer-Marvi (Sindh) inspire and bond  Pakistani masses  together. English socialite, Jewish Heiress Jemima Khan, recalled listening to the Sufi Rahat Nusrat Fateh singing classic poet Ghalib at heritage Haveli (mansion) of the grandson of poet philosopher Dr. Iqbal , a stone-throw away from “Royal street” (the infamous dancing girls’ street) and “Food  street” Lahore, in the company of thespian legends, among them Indian Muslim Naseer-uddin shah(who co-incidentally played the role of  Ghalib in biographical movie) . The write-up captures the contradictions and beauty of Pakistani identity. Pakistan’s biggest export to its eastern neighbour, India is culture in form of Poetry, Pop music, Sufi Qawali and its TV dramas. Indians consider Pakistanis as a custodian of Mughal  Muslim tradition of undivided India, Urdu Bhasha is the lingua franca of Bollywood movies. Cricket is the passion, entertainment and pastime of the working, lower middle class Pakistanis. For the masses the pride and joy of winning a world championship was immeasurable. The cricketers become overnight heroes of the Pakistani nation. Pakistani cricketers (as a team), barring the two “Jehovah’s Muslims” Yousaf(a Christian apostate) and Inzimam(ex-clubbing fanatic  turned Islamist), are the new poster boys for modernity, liberal life_style_ and international success, the fast bowler “Rawalpindi express” Shoaib Akhter is more (in)famous for his night-clubbing and binge drinking than for his cricketing talents. Even the neighbouring Afghanistan has caught the cricket fever, despite the game being banned by the puritanical Taliban in mid 90s.  We should not let chauvinistic nationalism blind us from the shame of military blunders and human rights violations but Pakistani society still has the vitality to rise again from ashes after every major crisis and disaster. In Struggle for democracy in 1980s, floods of 1992, earthquake in 2005, judicial movement in 2007 and refugee crisis in Swat valley and fight against Islamic terrorism, Pakistanis unite and open their arms for their less fortunate brothers and sisters. 99% of the Pakistanis are not the isolationist fanatics, that world media and the Islamists portray them to be. Pakistanis have a new found confidence that they can compete with the best in the world despite all difficulties. Three of the current cricketing heroes namely Yunus Khan, Shahid Afridi and Umer Gul are ethnic Pushtun and come from North West Frontier, an area battling the Islamist terrorist. Cricketing success has shown the youth of Pakistan a new way. Back on the streets of Bradistan even the English, Indian Gujarati and Bosnian Muslims joined in the chants of “Boom Boom Afridi”, and I said the future is bright the future is green. ...and I am Sid Harth

http://twocircles.net/2009aug14/nehru_jinah_and_partition.html Nehru, Jinah and partition Submitted by admin4 on 14 August 2009 - 5:00pm. ArticlesIndian MuslimMuslim World News By Asghar Ali Engineer, Mr. Jaswant Singh, a senior BJP leader from Rajasthan has written a book on Jinnah which is expected to be published shortly. He has, according to a news item on NDTV, called Jinnah a secular person and thrown responsibility for partition on Nehru. Earlier Mr. L. K. Advani had also described Jinnah as secular while visiting Jinnah’s mausoleum in Karachi and paid heavy price for it as RSS asked him to resign as president of BJP. And now Jaswant Singh, a fairly independent minded leader has called Jinnah a secular person. No doubt Jinnah is a highly controversial figure. He is greatly admired and is father of the nation in Pakistan. He is often referred to as Baba-e-Qaum by Pakistanis. But he is hated by many in India and is considered mainly responsible for creation of Pakistan and hence a villain of the peace. Such extremes can never adequately define a person, let alone being understood adequately. The motives for describing Jinnah as secular by two top BJP leaders may be different but there is an element of truth in what they say. Shri Advani was speaking as a politician during his visit and may be he tried to peace his hosts in Pakistan. Mr. Jaswant Singh is under no such obligation and is speaking as a scholar as he is known to be of fairly independent mind and may not be much concerned about what RSS and BJP leaders might think. It is not only in India that Jinnah is subject to different interpretations, some hating him as breaker of India and some absolving him of total responsibility for partition. Jinnah is subject to different interpretation in Pakistan itself some moderate and liberal Muslims describing him as secular and often quoting his speech in the Constituent Assembly as a proof of his secularism. The conservatives and orthodox Muslims, on the other hand, projecting him as believer in two nation theory and true Muslim who created Pakistan for Islam and Muslims. We have the same problem with Mahatma Gandhi in our own country. Some Dalit and RSS leaders hate him again for different reasons. Dalits hate him as an upper caste Hindu leader who upheld the concept of caste, if not of untouchability. And RSS leaders hate him, though publicly they may not take such position for obvious reasons. They hate him as they consider Gandhi as betrayer of Hindu cause and supporter of Muslims. They even indulge in propaganda that Gandhiji is responsible for partition of the country. Many people hold Nehru as responsible for partition and among those who hold Nehru as responsible there are all types of people – secular as well as communal. The question arises who is really responsible? We Indians and Pakistanis while holding our own leaders as responsible we have completely exonerated the British rulers of their responsibility for partition. Though secular elements at times do refer to the role of the British, communal forces in both the countries have completely absolved British. In RSS propaganda main culprits are Muslims led by Jinnah whereas in Pakistani propaganda it is Hindus led by Gandhi who are mainly responsible for partition. If one studies the complex developments carefully in mid-fifties it is difficult to fix total responsibility on any one person or one party. Different actors played different role adding up to partition of the country. First let us see the role of Jinnah since he is at the centre-stage of partition. Before this we also have to look at him whether he was secular or communal. It must be noted that we cannot go by western definition of secular and communal. We have accepted these terms in our own sense and in our own context. Gandhiji was secular despite being highly religious in his attitude. Nehru, of course, was secular more in western than in Indian sense. Similarly Jinnah was also secular more in western sense. Both Nehru and Jinnah never were religious as Gandhi and Maulana Azad were. Nehru was closer to Jinnah than to Gandhiji and Maulana Azad was closer to Gandhiji than to Jinnah. Maulana Azad also was deeply a religious person like Gandhiji though he was more liberal in religious matters than Gandhiji. Jinnah was thoroughly westernized person right from his younger days. He never had any religious training. He did not observe any Islamic taboos like liquor and pork. He never observed religious rituals. He even disagreed with Gandhiji about involving Ulama in politics and he opposed Gandhiji taking up Khilafat question. He believed in separation of politics from religion. He was described as Muslim Gokhale by friends. Gokhale was liberal and so was Jinnah. Jinnah was certainly secular in this sense. He until 1935 described himself as Indian first and then Muslim. And, until 1937 he had never thought of partition even in his dreams. He even entered into an informal understanding with the congress in 1937 elections in U.P. His differences with Indian National Congress had begun from 1928 onwards when his demands were rejected by the Nehru committee set up by the Congress to solve communal problem. He had even ridiculed the concept of Pakistan initially propounded by Rahmat Ali, a Cambridge University student. The two nation theory was deeply flawed and Jinnah had formulated it as a sort of political revenge on the Congress leaders like Nehru who refused to take two Muslim League nominees in the U.P. cabinet after Muslim league lost 1937 elections and Nehru was responsible for this. Maulana Azad tried to persuade Nehru to take the two nominees but unfortunately Nehru did not budge. Some scholars suggest that Rafi Ahmed Kidwai, an influential Congress leader from U.P. prompted Nehru. Whatever the reason political it was unwise not to take two Muslim league nominees. Maulana Azad has pointed this out and has criticized Nehru on this count in his political biography India Wins Freedom. For Jinnah it was outright betrayal and he decisively turned against Congress and gradually it led Jinnah to propounding two nation theory. Thus two nation theory was a politically contingent proposition rather than any religiously grounded proposition. Had Nehru shown little political sagacity this theory would not have come into existence at all. And in no sense of the word Jinnah ever wanted to establish an Islamic state in Pakistan. Jinnah would not have even approved of Pakistan having Islam as an official religion. That was not his bent of mind. If one goes by Jinnah’s speech in the Pakistan Constituent Assembly it is doubtful if he wanted even a Muslim state, let alone an Islamic state. He was all for a secular state in Pakistan. Then if we call Jinnah communal in what sense can he be described as one? Or can he be? In those days when we were fighting for freedom of our country communalism was not opposite of secularism, but of nationalism. Anyone who was anti-national was described as communal. Thus if at all Jinnah could be described communal it is in this sense. And as pointed out above, Jinnah opted for partition not as a part of his conviction but as a result of political contingency. Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru was responsible in a way as he was not very happy with the Cabinet Mission Plan as it would have resulted in weak centre as except defence, foreign policy and communication all residuary powers would have rested with the federating states. Both Nehru and Sardar Patel were not happy with this scheme. And as Azad has pointed out in his book Nehru, on being elected as president of the congress in 1946, gave a statement that Cabinet Mission Plan could be, if necessary, changed. This infuriated Jinnah as Muslim League had also accepted the Plan and a composite Government was formed after 1946 fall elections. This finally drove Jinnah to accept nothing less than partition. The greatest culprit was British rulers as they also wanted India divided so that they could easily establish intelligence and military _base_ in Pakistan to stem the tide of revolution which by then had become a certainty in China. Nehru Government would have never allowed such _base_s in United India. Lord Mount Batten got Nehru, through his wife Advina to endorse the partition plan. Thus it would be seen that apart from Jinnah the British and Nehru were also responsible for partition of the country. In my opinion the greatest responsibility of partition lay on the British shoulder. They cleverly maneuvered the complex situation in a way to make partition a reality. Partition, as Maulana Azad also pointed out, was neither in the interest of India nor in the interest of Muslims themselves. The ultimate result of partition is that Muslims of Indian sub- continent stand divided into three units and Kashmir problem is also result of this tragedy. And both the countries are spending billions of rupees on their armies and now such powerful interests have developed in keeping conflict between the two countries alive that all efforts for talks fail. Now the only solution is in confederation of nations of South Asia, with no visa and common currency. If European countries could form a viable union despite the fact that they were at each others throats until late forties why can’t we in South Asia? ...and I am Sid Harth