Kolkata-based Aziz Mubarki, national secretary of South Asia Ulama Council - a body of muslim religious leaders - says that madrasas are being converted into regular schools and soon the Muslim pupils could become a minority in all modern madrasas.

“Islam is not against modern education or moderization of education. But can we call these institution madrasas when students cannot offer namaaz or prayer inside these institutions? Do you think it can be called a madrasa when the Muslim children cannot offer namaaz or prayer inside the madrasa? This is practically what is happening inside these so-called modern madrasas. They are turning the madrasas into ordinary schools, in the name of modernization. We completely disagree with such modernization.”


http://www.asiacalling.org/en/news/india/2007-modern-madrasas-draw-non-muslim-pupils

MUSLIM QUOTA: WHY CONGRESS LEFT KHURSHID ISOLATED?

The response on the controversy surrounding Salman Khurshid's statement on Muslim reservation is enormous with every political party vying for his head. But the question remains intact: Has Mr. Khurshid done any wrong in quoting from the manifesto of the Congress party? Apparently the disapproval is as he made statements for the development of Muslims, upliftment of socio-economic status of the community. Leave aside the opposition some from his own political outfit, his colleagues have shown strong reservations on his comments. Even though Muslims hardly have anything to achieve from the entire controversy and doubt even Khurshid’s concerns as crocodile tears, but then too he has shown some courage and sincerity to speak truth even if it was meant for political mileage over his opponents.

This is Congress culture

It is so gloomy to see Mr. Salman Khurshid literally isolated and secluded in his own party defending his legitimate statement but regrettably this has been the Congress culture all along. One might recall how this party shunned A.R. Antulay for his similar pro-Muslim remarks on the floor of the house during UPA –I regime, resulting which he was dumped and denied a parliamentary elections ticket later in 2009 thus bringing an end to his political career as well. This “run with the hare and hunt with the hounds”, policy has engendered dearly to the Congress’s credibility.

In that way BJP is much more anchored and deeply rooted as they tend to stand beside their leaders in whatever the outcome or circumstances be. The entire world cried foul with 2002 Gujarat Riots with Narendra Modi at the centre of all negative attention or L.K. Advani faced similar flakes during Babri Masjid demolition and aftermath, but the party threw its weight behind on both such incidents. The entire Hindutva machinery was put on damage control to see trouble through.



"Only a Hindu can be a Muslim leader"

While Khurshid was never a Muslim, in the way identity politics tags leaders by community or caste. The Anglophile's labored Hindi-Urdu made him incompatible with the suitable 'minority' image, and it appeared in tune with intra-party dynamics. The traditional belief in Congress has held that "only a Hindu can be a Muslim leader". Biggies like H N Bahuguna and Arjun Singh carefully cultivated the "secular" image. AICC general secretary Digvijaya Singh has modeled himself on his guru Dau saab, his controversial views on reservation, Batla House and even his "Osamaji" seen in that light. Congressmen believe that a Muslim's backing of minority issues in a country with the ghost of the Partition would draw charges of "communalism", which in itself is absurd. In a country like ours every community, caste, section have their own indigenous leadership for advocacy of their needs and requirements i.e.; Paswan and Mayawati for Dalits, Laloo and Mulayam for Yadavs, Advani and team for upper caste Hindus but none to speak exclusively for rights and dignity of Muslims. Why? Why so much fusses when someone talks about Muslims in India? Muslims are no aliens but part of this country and seeking one’s justifiable Right guaranteed is no appeasement by any means.

Muslim quota a legitimate demand

Muslims are 13.4 per cent of India’s population and are considered to be a marginalized community because in comparison to other communities, they have over the years been deprived of the benefits of socio-economic development. Recognizing that Muslims in India were lagging behind in terms of various development indicators, the government set up a high-level committee in 2005. Chaired by Justice Rajindar Sachar, the committee examined the social, economic and educational status of the Muslim community in India. The report discusses in detail the marginalization of this community. It suggests that on a range of social, economic and educational indicators the situation of the Muslim community is comparable to that of other marginalized communities like Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Economic and social marginalization experienced by Muslims has other dimensions as well. Like other minorities, Muslim customs and practices are sometimes quite distinct from what is seen as the mainstream.

The Indian Dalit Muslims (considering its overall condition, the entire community must be considered as Dalit/OBC, but that’s a different issue all together) are a part of society, which is completely absent from the Constitution, parliamentary democracy and the debates of mainstream politics. The census report usually records the number count of the different castes included as Dalit and a brief outline on their present status. But in these reports, we find not even a trace of the population of Dalit Muslims. The deeply disturbing fact however is that the public sphere of our society doesn’t even deem it necessary to hold discussions on this group. It is very surprising that neither the media nor the academia or even street discussions have ever included this group within the ambit of their discussion.

As per the 2001 census and the National Curriculum Framework (NCF) of 2005 Muslims in India have abysmally low say in governance despite having literacy percentage of 59 against Hindus' 65. They are the most deprived in terms of socio-economic parameters including their share of jobs.

Follow the table for details:

3% of IAS officers,

4% of IPS officers

1.8 % of Indian Foreign Service (IFS) officers are from the community

2.2 % of all bank employees, including of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), are Muslims.

Drawing a comparison with Hindus, it says that while 63.6 % of Muslims live in non-permanent houses, 55.2 % Hindus live in similar conditions

30% of Muslims have access to electricity while 43.2 % of Hindus have access to electricity.

(Similarly) 19.4 % of Muslims have access to piped water against 25.3 % Hindus.

Jains were the most literate at 94 %, followed by Christians at 80 %, Buddhists at 73 %, Sikhs at 70% and Hindus at 65 %.

25% of Muslim children in the 6-14 age group have either never been to school or have dropped out. This percentage is much higher than of other community.

But irrespective of all above there are political parties who still see “Muslim appeasements” in all corrective initiatives and visions to rectify the social, economic and educational imbalance of all these years. And in such a case the community gracefully desires to change position with the “so called” underprivileged and deprived majority community with the privileges and advantages Muslims enjoys!

But whatever the outcome the suave minister's unexpected belligerence over last fortnight on 'Muslim issues' woke party men and observers to a new Khurshid, one eager to be seen as community leader. An absolute about-turn for the man, who spent years in Congress resisting use of identity as a bargaining chip and after March 6, Salman Khurshid may find it tough to live down the image of a 'Muslim' leader. However let’s hope his enlightened concerns are real this time.

http://twocircles.net/2012feb15/muslim_quota_why_congress_left_khurshid_isolated.html#comment-212938

INTERNATIONAL MEDIA IS “EQUALLY BIASED” AGAINST MUSLIMS & ISLAM …

There are numerous cases to judge whether there is bias against Muslims in the media, but in recent times look no further than the press coverage regarding the terrorist attack that took place in Norway not very long ago. Impartial population waited impatiently to read this act being explicitly described as a “terrorist attack” or an “act of terrorism” by the mainstream media.
But never once the “Christian” label was used despite the fact that Mr. Breivik was a self-described devout Christian often comparing his “holy” mission to that of the Knights Templar, a group of warriors that formed the core of the Crusades who invaded Muslim lands during the 12th century. To use the Christian label would certainly be wrong as it is well established that Christianity, like Islam and Judaism, never ignore acts of violence against innocent people.
But notwithstanding the fact that the alleged executor of the attack was a Christian who is well known in Facebook circles, the religion, while mentioned in some articles, was never the center of attention. The media instead described the attacker as a “far right-wing” extremist who was inclined by a “Neo-Nazi” type of philosophy.
Therefore the important question is: Why is it when the person responsible for the terrorist act happens to be Muslim all of a sudden the religion becomes the focus instead? And Terms such as “Islamic terrorism”, “Islamic extremism” or “Islamic fundamentalism” are often used to describe the ideology the killer clings to. The Western governments add fuel to the fire of Islamophobic sentiments in their societies with inflammatory and rabble-rousing actions and statements, the Western media mischievously try their best to portray a lopsided, biased and prejudiced image of Muslims in an attempt which should be interpreted as an incontestable crusade against more than 25% of the world population.

It is important to know that Muslims have been predictably considered as the villains of the fables of the Western governments and despite their undeniable and precious services to the world, they never received a fair, reasonable and humane treatment by the superpowers, either from the dishonest, deceitful and warmonger Russia that massacred some 50,000 innocent Muslims in Chechnya, or from the egotistical, bullying United States that caged scores of blameless Muslims in its illegitimate, underground confinement in Guantanamo bay and Abu Ghraib following the 9/11 attacks. As a result of such malicious propaganda by the unfair media the public got so much used to using these house-hold tags, that many from the community are being called 'Osama,' 'terrorist,' 'al-Qaeda' in the workplace, by their co-workers or are not being hired or are sacked just because of their hijab’s.

But nobody asked the Western media that how it would be possible to defend the killing of unarmed civilians as an act of self defense while they even lacked a knife to defend their lives against the rifles of the Israeli commandos. When it was needed to lower the depth of the truth, the mainstream media scored the best goal: 3,500 guiltless Gazans were massacred in a short period of less than 3 weeks, and the Western media acted so unsympathetically that one might have felt as if nothing had really taken place!
Although the European and American politicians and statesmen have unarguably admitted that Israel is the sole owner of nuclear weapons in the Middle East, they have never made any effort to inspect Israel's nuclear armory which contains up to 200 atomic warheads; however, they have destroyed Iraq and have lethally put an ever-increasing demands on Iran to abandon its nuclear rights and put an end to its nuclear program which the International Atomic Energy Agency has avowed as nonviolent and unthreatening.

The unfair Media deliberately introduce Muslims as terrorists and try to institutionalize the idea that Muslims are always inclined to carry out excessive actions such as killing the other people or persecuting the followers of other religions or forcing them to convert to Islam. They misuse some pillars and principals of Islam to portray their preferred image of this religion and its followers and hence spread panic and fear among the Europeans and Americans.

The Western media outlets never show the real image of Islam to their audiences and neither tell them that the essence of this religion is based on mutual respect, benevolence, peace, love and human dignity. They never allude to the fact that the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was one of the pioneers of human rights in his time and emphasized on preserving and respecting the human dignity enormously. They never reveal the verses of Holy Quran in which it is declared that killing one person is tantamount to killing all of the persons in the view of Islam. They never tell their audiences that in the view of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), it was even unlawful to kill a sparrow for the sake of entertainment. Hence will the mainstream media ever admit that they too share some responsibility in helping promote hatred towards Muslims?


Unfortunately, the public opinion in the West is unaware of the realities of Islam and Muslims. The media has the power to shape the public opinion one way or the other and expecting impartiality will never be considered as seeking a favour. In the words of Malcolm X “The media is the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that’s power”


http://twocircles.net/2012feb01/international_media_equally_biased_against_muslims_islam.html

http://www.icare.to/article.php?id=37668&lang=en

http://dawoodi-bohras.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6926#p90226

http://www.siasat.com/english/news/international-media-equally-biased-against-muslims-islam

http://kashmirmonitor.org/02032012-ND-media-bias-against-islam-and-muslims-19854.aspx

Not Reservation but adequate Representation will help Muslims

In a major decision ahead of the upcoming Assembly elections in five states, the Union Cabinet has approved 4.5% sub-quota reservation to minorities carved out from the existing quota of 27% for the Other Backward Castes category. Moreover with an eye on electoral politics, a prominent Muslim Union Minister has promised a 9% sub quota for Muslims in the 27% OBC quota if Congress comes to power in the state of Uttar Pradesh.

However the community is aware that all such announcements are politically motivated with a standardized intent of political mileage. In addition, such announcements extending perks and privileges by different political parties (if they are in power) are farce and have become somewhat synonymous with politics in India. It is a culture these days to make exorbitant promises during elections and forego all such oratory vows after elections. No political party has ever offered to liberate Muslims from the misery and mess of deep rooted ghettoisation.

Unfortunately no initiatives were ever taken such as intensification of land reforms, extension of credit facilities, and clearance of backlogs in respect of poverty alleviation programme, development initiatives, and measures to spread education. A notable point in this context is that Muslims required most attention and privilege from successive governments in addition to SC/ST, but this is something that the administrators and political parties have simply ignored. There has been a “Positive Discrimination” by the higher but Communal bureaucrats, as they do not show any genuine interest in implementing “Constitutional guidelines”. A large number of posts remain unfulfilled but the officials show least interest in clearing backlogs. This only shows constitutional guideline is not enough to bring a big change in raising the social, educational and economic status of Muslims, but a “Political Will” to implement is required too.

Even Article 340 could not make way for justice or equal opportunity and a fair chance of representation to Muslims either in studies or in government jobs. More and more people are dependent on hand skills, labour, small trades, and jobs in private establishments. All this has only resulted in increasing the number of unemployed in the country. The situation is even worse than the Dalits, particularly because even Dalits have their leaders and representation but Muslims have reached such a stage where hand to mouth is a priority and hence have failed here to.

And as this was not the end of grieves, came 1990’s and violence was reported from almost all quarters of the country, there was a steep rise in atrocities against minorities across the country. The manifestation of communal forces’ prejudice against minorities was now more cruel and vulgar than in the past, like the pre 1990 conflicts were spontaneous in nature, but now the events were meticulously chalked, organized and systematically executed. What happened in Gujarat 2002 and Orissa in 2007 are somewhat glaring examples. In both the cases, they were not riots or conflicts between members of two communities. In Gujarat, it was practically a genocide perpetrated with the active support and consent of the government. In Orissa, on the other hand, it was the members of the right wings groups who literally hunted the Christians out of their establishments, tortured & murdered them. In both the cases the police force, mostly packed with members of non minorities, often side with the attackers or remained mute spectators. Most of Human right activists and secular political observers feel that violence against minorities/Muslims cannot be contained unless the police are impartial and Acts like Anti Discrimination Law is effectively used against the guilty.


Coming back to the point timely Reservation could have had some effect on the overall conditions of Muslims in India, but there as well a strong government action aimed at their emancipation was required. Reservation which was gestated as an option for removing social inequality, has failed in the past several decades. Those with better vote banks, more control over them and with better pressure tactics gained and got themselves included in the reserved list. But Muslims as leaderless community was left in lurch hereto, a time when every community is trying hard to be reserved in some category or the other as “being reserved'’ brings security for the next generation. For getting themselves reserved, parties are born. The primary idea of reservation was to remove social inequality, but instead more divisions appeared.

It is important to understand the objectives of reservation policies. It intends to create a system in which the less privileged get an opportunity to compete and excel. The structure of the policy should be such that it removes the very need to have it erased over a finite period. The statement, although simple, is hard to implement in practice. A successful application would imply concerted efforts of all, in various spheres of activity. It must remove social/religious/caste/creed based imbalances and biasness in all spheres, and if it happens, it would be our second freedom struggle.

In fact the present growth of pressure groups would make the whole population reserved in some class or the other in the foreseeable future. The policies framed, worked against the very objective for which they were created! A privileged group among the reserved has been created, who compete against their brethren to enjoy the benefits. This competition goes on and on and as a result, a creamy layer or super-caste within caste has evolved. Its members are similar to the privileged of the unreserved class, except for the apparent biological manifestations, which unfortunately the years of reservation could not erase. The reserved who enjoyed the benefits refused to acknowledge the fact that they were recipients of social support and considered the two-three letter acronym a curse and tried to hide it as much as possible, except when it came to admissions, recruitment, jobs and promotions. The fortunate among the reserved, who got admissions for better courses, did their best within their ability; got jobs, promotions, accommodation, social benefits, contacts, etc. and this continued for decades. It is natural that once the benefits of reservation are available to an individual, those continue along his/her family tree, forcing others in the community to compete with them. The majority, who does not enjoy the comforts, become further marginalized. As the size of the reservation pie is not increasing, the benefits of reservation do not reach the other sections of the less privileged.

The Ranganath Mishra Commission report recommends 10 percent quota for Muslims - the largest minority in the country. But the reservations' process will be wrought with imperfections as the community is divided into umpteen castes and sub-castes, a system that has percolated in them through their Hindu neighborhoods. Apart from that the approval of 4.5% quota reservation is to be shared between Muslims and half a dozen other religious minorities and will do more damage than good to the community and shall be the bone of contention between the groups concerned. What Muslims needs is more than reservation and quota politics, they rather need more schools in their areas than police stations. Instead of fighting over smaller slices of a small pie of the national income, what is needed is the expansion of the unbiased national pie which would help everyone to get their rightful and bigger share. The oppressed and the marginalized Muslim community need expansion of opportunities rather than half-baked, ill-thought favors’ from the state. The Muslims to have an honorable place must stop looking at charity in the form of reservations & quota’s and should seek fair representation as per its populace proportion. It’s so unfortunate that some politically motivated mullah & scholars are in favour of reservations, which is shocking in the sense that they want the Indian Muslim community to go in for the begging bowl by putting across incorrect demands.

And above all It is time our government gives up its restricted mindset as The Voices of reason demand that educational standards and qualifications should be standardized and impartial whatever the language, religion or region, with financial aid granted on the basis of performance instead of seat reservation. And if the government fails to realize the magnitude of the problem and do not implement the right solution with all collective wisdom, India will be the only existing society in which religion, caste, class and knowledge based divisions will coexist even in 2100.

Agitation against Rushdie’s visit and assembly elections

A controversy was brewing over the scheduled visit of Salman Rushdie, the well-known India-born British novelist, to India. Rushdie was scheduled to visit India to participate in the Jaipur Literate Festival along with a galaxy of other novelists. Darul Uloom Deoband, the Islamic seminary, had demanded that the central government debar the entry of Rushdie, whose novel, The Satanic Verses, outraged the Muslim world resulting in the novel being banned in India in 1988.

With passage of time, the agitated anxiety of the protestors has calmed and Rushdie, who had to remain underground for several years, is leading a normal life at present. He has visited India several times since then and even participated in the Jaipur Literature Festival in 2007, without inviting any protest. Therefore the cause of the present flare-up is little confusing. As it seems that the forthcoming polls in five states, especially in Uttar Pradesh, have something to do with the development. Perhaps the issue has been brought to the forefront keeping in mind the sizeable Muslim population of UP whose voting pattern might tilt the balance of power in the state.

India regardless of being an avowedly secular nation, has respected the religious perspective and popular sentiments. In a multicultural society like ours one must understand the social limit and the legitimate rights inherited therein, it shall not intrude or hurt others’ beliefs and sentiments therewith. Hence banning of satanic verses was not the isolated case, James Laine’s Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India and a famous Marathi play Mee Nathuram Godse Boltai were banned too. Even violent advances were attempted on famous painter M F Husain resulting his last years blighted by lawsuits and attacks for his nude paintings of Hindu divinities. Therefore, the claims that Muslims or Islam being intolerant are futile and unwarranted being ostensibly spread by semi educated journalists and politicians with vested interests, the inconsiderate truth is that “Might is Right” and “Vote Bank Politics” are a reality in India .

But it is also true that legally, there is nothing the government can do to stop Rushdie from visiting, without a visa. Although he is a British citizen, he has a Person of Indian Origin (PIO) card, which gives him the right to travel to India freely. It’s an interesting wrinkle to this latest iteration of the Rushdie-in-India saga. The PIO card was intended as a way for India to cultivate the influential, affluent network of overseas Indians by making it easier for them to visit India and own property. Immigration authorities perhaps never imagined that it would keep the doors open even for those Indians whose views might be unpopular or politically inconvenient.

United Progressive Alliance government is panicky as had already burnt its fingers by mishandling several issues in the recent past and with the elections round the corner shall not dare to stand further by the hallowed tenets of constitution. Apart from that Muslims, who make 18 percent of India's 1 billion-plus population, are a key constituency of India's ruling United Progressive Alliance-led coalition government, and it will be an uphill task for the Indian government to publicly antagonize the community ahead of key state elections this year. On the other hand Rushdie himself has maintained relative silence about the controversy.

Agitation against Rushdie’s visit and assembly elections..

A controversy was brewing over the scheduled visit of Salman Rushdie, the well-known India-born British novelist, to India. Rushdie was scheduled to visit India to participate in the Jaipur Literate Festival along with a galaxy of other novelists. Darul Uloom Deoband, the Islamic seminary, had demanded that the central government debar the entry of Rushdie, whose novel, The Satanic Verses, outraged the Muslim world resulting in the novel being banned in India in 1988.

With passage of time, the agitated anxiety of the protestors has calmed and Rushdie, who had to remain underground for several years, is leading a normal life at present. He has visited India several times since then and even participated in the Jaipur Literature Festival in 2007, without inviting any protest. Therefore the cause of the present flare-up is little confusing. As it seems that the forthcoming polls in five states, especially in Uttar Pradesh, have something to do with the development. Perhaps the issue has been brought to the forefront keeping in mind the sizeable Muslim population of UP whose voting pattern might tilt the balance of power in the state.

India regardless of being an avowedly secular nation, has respected the religious perspective and popular sentiments. In a multicultural society like ours one must understand the social limit and the legitimate rights inherited therein, it shall not intrude or hurt others’ beliefs and sentiments therewith. Hence banning of satanic verses was not the isolated case, James Laine’s Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India and a famous Marathi play Mee Nathuram Godse Boltai were banned too. Even violent advances were attempted on famous painter M F Husain resulting his last years blighted by lawsuits and attacks for his nude paintings of Hindu divinities. Therefore, the claims that Muslims or Islam being intolerant are futile and unwarranted being ostensibly spread by semi educated journalists and politicians with vested interests, the inconsiderate truth is that “Might is Right” and “Vote Bank Politics” are a reality in India .

But it is also true that legally, there is nothing the government can do to stop Rushdie from visiting, without a visa. Although he is a British citizen, he has a Person of Indian Origin (PIO) card, which gives him the right to travel to India freely. It’s an interesting wrinkle to this latest iteration of the Rushdie-in-India saga. The PIO card was intended as a way for India to cultivate the influential, affluent network of overseas Indians by making it easier for them to visit India and own property. Immigration authorities perhaps never imagined that it would keep the doors open even for those Indians whose views might be unpopular or politically inconvenient.

United Progressive Alliance government is panicky as had already burnt its fingers by mishandling several issues in the recent past and with the elections round the corner shall not dare to stand further by the hallowed tenets of constitution. Apart from that Muslims, who make 18 percent of India's 1 billion-plus population, are a key constituency of India's ruling United Progressive Alliance-led coalition government, and it will be an uphill task for the Indian government to publicly antagonize the community ahead of key state elections this year. On the other hand Rushdie himself has maintained relative silence about the controversy.

The US invasion of Iraq & Libya were serious violation of the UN Charter...

Since the sad, inglorious and atrocious murder of the Libyan strongman, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, the local dailies all over the globe are filled with ugly and unspeakable sermons about him. The annoyance is that prime pages are dedicated to articles on Gaddafi misdeeds and Most of the writers paint Gaddafi as an evil man, a terrorist, a thief, a dictator, a murderer and a man with no iota of conscience. Some say that Gaddafi was a thorn in the flesh of the first world nations, especially America, for their meddlesomeness and violation of the territorial integrity of underdeveloped and developing nations.

But the veiled thing that plays behind every venture of man is “profit”. Hence it is important to think over, is it possible for the foreign powers that pulled down the government of Gaddafi to waste their funds in these hard times of global depression without an unambiguous plan to make yield? Now that the destruction of Libya is over, the foreign powers are beginning to angle for who gets what, in the rebuilding of Libya. The foreign powers can never go on board on an extravagant gamble. The oil wealth of Libya is the sure target of the alliance forces and they have succeeded.

The query subsequently is who profits the most if Gaddafi were to quit and would it really bring egalitarianism to Libya. Everyone on the street knows this was only about oil and banking. Until last year, Libya was producing nearly two million barrels of oil a day. To put that in perspective, India’s daily national utilization of oil is roughly three million barrels a day. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), Libya a member of OPEC sits on one of the largest proven oil reserves in the world. Although Libya is not major oil producers such as Saudi Arabia, Iraq, the UAE or Russia, but it reserves of crude oil are about 3% of the world’s total. Apart from above Libyan oil is considered of optimum quality with low sulphuric substance. And geographically too, Libya is far away from the Gulf region; consequently Libyan oil exports are not subject to the fluctuations resulting from Gulf’s political affairs. And above all the western powers most active in opposing the Gaddafi regime, namely the US, UK and France, import only 0.5% and 8.5% of Libyan oil as compared to their total imports? Now does that mean anything?

For many unaware with his works, Gaddafi’s name was identical with bizarre, even unusual manners, accentuated by maddening diplomacy wound up in dazzling costumery and dizzying dithyrambs. But the lesser known facts are Pre-Gaddafi Libya was one of the poorest countries on the world. Life expectancy in the 1960s was only 46 years. There was no health system to speak of in those days. Most Libyans lived in tents around the few pastures around the desert. Nearly the entire population of Libya was a rural society. For the past 40 years, Libya faced economic sanctions from most of the western world. Ethnic tensions were widespread and water was inadequate even literacy was less than 20 percent.

But Gaddafi single handedly built his country over four decades — from the sand and remnants of tribal society and turned it into metropolis culture. It was under him that the health status of his subject improved remarkably in comparison with the rest of West Asia (that includes Saudi Arabia). Life expectancy in Libya before the recent conflict began was 77.65 years. Literacy was at 82.6 percent and over 97 percent of the population had access to sanitation facilities. It just cannot be ignored that in the 1980s and ’90s, Gaddafi undertook what is to date the world’s largest drinking water project: 6,000 km of pipelines carried water under the Sahara to different corners of Libya. Libya ranks 58 out of 177 on the 2004 United Nations Development Programme’s Human Development Report, which measures quality of life.

In addition to the projects and development he carried out using his country’s petro-dollars, Gaddafi was a leading financier of development across Africa. More worryingly for the West, Gaddafi, not unlike other gulf rulers, was actively seeking to delink the price of oil from the dollar and float a new bullion based currency, in this case, a gold African dinar. This prompted Sarkozy to call Libya, “a threat to the financial security of mankind”, and it was the root cause of all trouble with the western powers. The trouble with the Colonel was he had sat there in authority far too long for a fuel-hungry Europe and North America to remain patient. Therefore Gaddafi’s end engineered by the US led NATO forces, after Saddam Hussein’s hanging in 2006 proves yet again that in the current world order, the United States of America can do whatever it wishes with other nations and leaders who do not toe its line.



Gaddafi treated his opponents perhaps almost as shoddily as American soldiers treat their prisoners at the villainous Abu Ghraib jail in Iraq. But then saying this does not means any support to the tormenters- be it Saddam Hussein or Colonel Gaddafi. But the military escalation on Libya was a second time that NATO is involved in an armed adventure outside its geographical zone. The point is this going to become a pattern in the future? The value of the human catastrophe, like in all wars, is inestimable. The stories of the aggressions on Libya are upsetting, the images extremely disturbing. And for those of us, who live in what is termed the Third World, the fate of Libya is something from which we must take note of. In his last address to the UN Security Council, in 2006-07, Gaddafi had asked, “What was the reason to invade Iraq? We want to know because it is mysterious and ambiguous and we may face the same destiny. The invasion in itself was and is a serious violation of the UN Charter.”

On September 17, 2002 the Bush administration published its “National Security Strategy of the United States of America.” So far, there has been no serious examination of this important document in the unbiased media. This is unfortunate, to say the least, because this document advances the political and theoretical justification for a massive rise of American militarism. The document asserts as the guiding procedure of the United States the right to use military might anywhere in the world, at any time it chooses, against any country it believes to be, or it believes may at some point become, a threat to American welfare. No other country in modern history, not even Nazi Germany at the height of Hitler’s madness, has asserted such a sweeping claim to global supremacy—or, to put it more candidly, world domination—as is made by the United States. In another passage, the document warns that the United States will take the actions necessary to guarantee that their efforts to meet their global security commitments and protect Americans are not impaired by the potential for investigations, inquiry, or prosecution by the International Criminal Court (ICC), whose jurisdiction does not extend to Americans and which they wouldn’t accept. In other words, the actions of the leaders of the United States will not be restrained by the conventions of international law! The disagreement is that the US hardly cares about egalitarianism or the well being of the people of other nations as long as its own financial and military interests are served. And this artificiality can well be judged by the fact that, the US doesn’t denounce human rights violations in countries like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia which to us all are equally fraudulent and callous regimes.

After Gaddafi’s assassination the National Transitional Council (NTC) is in the process of running democratically elected government in the country. But for the Council steering Libya out to at least a near-perfect democracy will not be an easy job when the country has no contemporary history of party politics or the rule of law. The Arab experience has not been particularly forthcoming. Much of the Arab world is ruled by hereditary monarchies, military regimes and autocrats. A recent trend has been that even autocracies have become hereditary, as it was in the case of Syria. There is barely a functioning democracy anywhere in the region .Even where democratic elections are held, inconvenient winners are soon overthrown or not allowed to assume power due to significant external intervention or with the connivance of multi-national oil companies, as in the case of Algeria. So, it will be interesting to watch how the council establishes a democracy in Libya which had been in anarchy for decades.


http://theeasternpost.org/show_news_archive.php?ofPage=12&dt=2012-01-18