Stop blaming Pakistan for every terror attack on Indian soil

Here is a good article by Raza Rumi who says, "Since 2009, 31 military installations, including airbases and intelligence headquarters [within Pakistan], have been attacked by the militants affiliated with the Al Qaeda, the Pakistani Taliban, and its affiliate and the sectarian killer group, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ). The attacks on Pakistan’s naval and air bases have led to the destruction of expensive equipment and loss of military personnel. If terrorism is sponsored singularly by Pakistan’s intelligence networks, then it would be irrational to believe that the military attacks its own installations. There seem to be few takers of Pakistan’s position as a “victim of terrorism.” The facts, however, cannot be brushed aside. More than 80,000 Pakistanis, including 6,300 or more security personnel, have been killed during the past decade."

Saudis bombed a center for the blind in Yemen

The new year seems to have brought little change for civilians living under bombs in Yemen. Early Tuesday morning, missiles reportedly fired by aircraft supporting the Saudi-led and U.S.-backed coalition damaged a center for the blind in the capital city of Sanaa, as well as the city’s chamber of commerce, a wedding hall, and at least one residential area. You can read the news by clicking here.
This brings the total number of civilians recorded killed over nine months of fighting to 2,795, with an additional 5,324 civilians recorded wounded, raising the total number of recorded civilian casualties in the conflict to 8,119. 

According to Rupert Colville, spokesperson for the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, the U.N. documented the presence of cluster munitions in “several” Yemeni villages and two separate incidents of unexploded ordinance injuring people.

Condemned by international groups for the risks they pose to civilians, cluster bombs are banned in a 2008 treaty signed by 117 nations around the world. Saudi Arabia and the United States, however, are not on that list. Last year, Human Rights Watch presented evidence that Saudi Arabia had used U.S.-supplied cluster bombs in its war against the Houthis. At the time, the Saudi government — which in 2015 replenished its arsenal with 22,000 bombs purchased in a $1.2 billion, U.S. State Department-approved deal — insisted that it uses cluster bombs only on legitimate targets.

Journalists and human rights groups have repeatedly exposed the tremendous humanitarian costs associated with the continued bloodshed in Yemen, particularly those associated with coalition airstrikes (see here, hereand here). For the time being, however, the conflict shows no sign of letting up. Indeed, the latest rounds of strikes follow the breakdown of a tenuous ceasefire agreed upon last month.

One Map That Explains the Dangerous Saudi-Iranian Conflict

Here is an interesting article to understand the crisis between Saudi Arabia and Iran. 
Almost all the oil fields in Saudi Arabia are under Shi'ite territories. This is much like Russian oil fields, which are mostly in the Muslim territories of Chechnya, or the Chinese mineral territories which are in the Uyghur territories of Xinjiang. The loss of those oil and mineral fields would make those regimes look broke or weak, providing the justification for them as to why they are determined to keep such territories by hook or crook. Massacre of unarmed inhabitants is thus seen as a collateral damage and nothing more!
In the words of Jon Schwarz, "If this section of eastern Saudi Arabia were to break away, the Saudi royals would just be some broke 80-year-olds with nothing left but a lot of beard dye and Viagra prescriptions." While such claims are exaggerations, the article sheds some light to understand the  current crisis.

British Colonials Starved to Death 60 million-plus Indians, But, Why?

In the past I have written a few times about British Raj's policies during the colonization of India (now South Asia) from 1757 to 1947.
When the East India Company (EIC) colonized Bengal (today's Bangladesh and its adjacent territories in India), Bengal was probably the richest country in the world with a population that had enough of every thing with a GDP that was higher than many countries of Europe, including England. Unfortunately, when the British left India, Bengal (or East Pakistan, in particular, which was later to become Bangladesh) became a very province. Why?
When the EIC took control over India, the latter had a population of 155 million. However, when the British left in 1947 after some 190 years of colonization, the population grew to only 355 million, reflecting an annual growth rate of only 0.49%. Now South Asia has a total population of 1.6 billion, while the people are poor. Since 1947, South Asia's population has grown annually by 2.1% in spite of poverty. How does one explain this phenomena? Was there a concerted effort by the colonizers to depopulate India?
Ramrtanu Maitra, like me, believes so. Here is his piece - British Colonials Starved to Death 60 million-plus Indians, But, Why?, which can be seen by clicking here.

2016 – Will it be any different than 2015?

The year 2015 is over. It was a very messy year in the global politics. Will 2016 be plagued by the same types of violence? In a fast paced world that we live today, it is difficult to predict the future. In what follows I shall attempt to review a few cases.

No region was probably more affected by the scourge of war than the Middle East where the Daesh (more commonly known here in the west as the ISIS or ISIL), the terrorist outfit, made significant territorial gains only to see much of such gains evaporate later in the midst of aerial bombardments from the NATO and the Russian forces. Through its religious nuances, no matter how absurd and ludicrous such claims are, it has been able to confuse many ill-informed youths around the globe to attract to its nihilistic causes and become its foot soldiers – both within and outside the territories it controls.

For a peaceful future, Daesh needs to be defeated ideologically, a task, which must be shouldered by Muslim scholars exposing their falsity. If they fail they would see their own territories drenched in blood by sectarian unrests, something that the Daesh likes to see happen.

Millions of Syrians and Iraqis have fled their war-torn countries and taken shelter in Turkey and other neighboring countries. Some of the refugees have also taken shelter in Europe where (with the exception of Germany) they continue to face unkind treatment and barriers towards their settlement. It’s highly likely that Europe and the rest of the world would continue to see such sporadic bursts of refugee influxes in the coming months unless the political conditions inside Syria and Iraq dramatically improve. It goes without saying that Russia’s dropping of bombs and missiles on the opposition targets have strengthened Bashar al-Assad’s hitherto weak bargaining position significantly. It is unlikely that the latter would step down anytime soon unless his main backers convince him to do so.  With him in power, there is little chance for any improvement in the affected region.

Down south, Boko Haram, another deadly terrorist group, continues to terrorize millions of people in West Africa, mostly in and around Nigeria. Like the Lord’s Resistance Army, it remains a formidable force that will continue killing and kidnapping the innocent people in vulnerable territories unless fully defeated, which is unlikely to happen any time soon.

The Central African Republic (CAR) had her long-delayed elections last week that probably represent the best hope of reuniting the country, one of the world’s poorest, after three years of ethnic cleansing that has displaced a million of minority Muslims. According to the New York Times, the turnout was heavy among the 1.8 million registered voters, nearly 40 percent of the population. Many of the Muslims, displaced by the genocidal wars by the Christian militias could not vote. More than 400,000 refugees — primarily in neighboring Cameroon, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Chad — have yet to return.

To this day, the country remains divided: Anti-balaka Christian militias hold territories in the west of the country and small pockets in Bangui, the capital city; the former Seleka rebels (mostly Muslims) control the north and center of the country; and the Lord’s Resistance Army, a brutal Christian terrorist and rebel movement that also operates in the Democratic Republic of Congo, South Sudan and Uganda, controls parts of the east. Only the coming days after the election results are declared would show whether or not the government can survive politically under a single flag. Its survival would surely require political compromise and tough choices, which if ignored could only divide the country along ethnic fault lines.

Myanmar (formerly Burma) had her own general election in November in which Suu Kyi’s NLD has come out as the clear winner. Most Muslims were barred from participating in this election. 2015 also saw tens of thousands of Rohingyas to brave the seas and Indian Ocean to seek shelter in Malaysia and Indonesia. It is worth noting that in their desire to leave the Burmese den of unfathomable hatred and intolerance many of these persecuted Rohingyas unfortunately became easy preys to brutal human traffickers. Many Rohingyas have also died in the hands of those criminals.

The President in Myanmar won’t be sworn in until March of 2016. It should be noted that the military-drafted constitution guarantees that unelected military representatives take up 25% of the seats in the Hluttaw and have a veto over constitutional change. Key security ministries (defense, home affairs and border affairs) are selected by the head of the army, not the president, and there can be no change to the constitution without military approval.

As such, while the NLD has won the general election in both the lower and upper houses of the parliament winning respectively 255 (of the 440) and 135 (of the 224) seats, the coming months will show whether or not Suu Kyi would be able to fulfill the dreams of her supporters bringing in a transformational change in this divided country of many races and religions, thus ensuring safety, security and inclusiveness of all.  For her to succeed she must be able to domesticate not only the all-powerful military but also the divisive and fascist forces like the Ma Ba Tha, led by skinhead monks, which tried to influence the election at the behest of the regime. Ma Ba Tha, sadly, continues to recruit and organize the racist and bigot populace for terrorizing the already marginalized Muslim minorities. Unless crushed, their criminal activities would only strengthen the divisive forces within the country that are already fighting the military for their legitimate racial, ethnic and religious rights.

One of the most surprising events of the last year was Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s impromptu visit of Pakistan when he met his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif in Lahore on his return trip from Moscow. It was the first visit to Pakistan by an Indian premier in almost 12 years. The tense relations between India and Pakistan, both nuclear-armed nations, have long been a worrisome matter for many area experts and policy makers, who fear that proxy wars between the two countries could flare into a real one. 

On his part, Modi had sent mixed signals about Pakistan. He surprised many by inviting Sharif to his swearing-in ceremony last year, but three months later abruptly halted that tentative engagement by canceling high-level talks over Pakistani diplomats’ meeting with separatist leaders from Kashmir.

Under his watch, the lives of minority Muslims and Christians in India have worsened significantly. Muslim and Christian places of worship and business have been attacked, and Muslims killed simply on suspicion of eating or storing beef, and transporting cattle. It is worth noting here that the slaughter of cows is banned in large parts of India but the country exports more beef than any other nation. India produced 43% of the world’s buffalo meat in 2015, the highest of any nation. India is expected to export 2.2 million tons of water buffalo in 2016, up from 2.1 million in 2015. The increase is due to rising demand from the Middle East, Africa and Southeast Asia. Vietnam and Malaysia are the largest export markets for India, according to the USDA. What is also seldom discussed is the fact that long before the coming of Islam on the Indian sub-continent, beef was widely consumed. According to history professor D.N. Jha, in the Vedic period it was particularly widely consumed.

The fascist Hindutvadi forces, mostly belonging to the Sangh Parivar, want to declare India a vegetarian country. They are trying to distort Indian history along religious lines and are also behind violent attacks against the minorities. Many well-to-do Muslims feel very insecure these days. When Bollywood superstars complained about the growing atmosphere of intolerance in India, they were labeled falsely as anti-India, unpatriotic and pro-Pakistan.

Rather than condemning such attacks and excesses of his party men, Modi has tried to ignore such issues. And yet, he recently signed a treaty with his counterpart in Bangladesh - Sheikh Hasina - which allowed for integration of affected people living in the landlocked enclaves, something that was denied for some 68 years.

This gives me hope against hopelessness. Probably not everything is lost. We can all hope for a better future. In this regards, Modi’s speech in Pakistan is quite memorable. 

“There are some who did not want us to be here. There were those who saw sinister designs in our presence here,” Mr. Modi said. “But, we are here because you have faith in us. You know that India is here to contribute, not to compete; to lay the foundations of future, not light the flame of conflict; to rebuild lives, not destroy a nation.”

I would like to believe that Mr. Modi did not speak with a forked tongue and was genuinely sincere and that the course he has taken toward Pakistan and Bangladesh has shifted to embrace engagement, not confrontation. 

Let’s hope that 2016 would be a better year than 2015 when our world leaders have learned from their past mistakes to take proper actions that make our world a better place to live together in peace and harmony. 

Opportunistic Islamophobia by Andrew Levine

ANDREW LEVINE is a Senior Scholar at the Institute for Policy Studies, the author most recently of THE AMERICAN IDEOLOGY (Routledge) and POLITICAL KEY WORDS (Blackwell) as well as of many other books and articles in political philosophy. His most recent book is In Bad Faith: What’s Wrong With the Opium of the People. He was a Professor (philosophy) at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and a Research Professor (philosophy) at the University of Maryland-College Park. 
His latest article - Opportunistic Islamophobia - is quite interesting. He discusses how George W. Bush's moment of decency in the aftermath of 9/11 -- when he rightly urged Americans not to blame all Muslims, and not to blame Islam, the religion the perpetrators professed and in the name of which they claimed to act -- was short lived when within days, he went before a joint session of Congress to proclaim that “they” did it because “they hate our freedom,” and that “we” will get “them,” just as surely as “whoever is not with us is against us.” Then he and Cheney and the neocons they empowered got to work mobilizing public support for the perpetual wars on the Muslim world that they had been yearning to launch.
On the question of seed of Islamophobia, Levine writes, "In the aftermath of Israel’s 1973 war with Egypt, when gas prices rose and Arabs got the blame, there were intimations of what could happen. But that blew over quickly, and was soon forgotten. It took 9/11 to break the spell."
Muslims in the United States now find themselves caught up in a similar situation, which visited the Japanese during the WW II. All the vast majority of them ever wanted was peace and quiet and opportunities to make a living. All they have been getting since 9/11 is grief.
In this resurgent Islamophobia, Judeo-Christians are taking the lead. Levine writes, "Before 9/11, even Christian fundamentalists were not especially bothered by the Muslims in their midst. It would never have occurred to them that their Muslim neighbors were slyly biding their time, the better to unleash terror on God-fearing Christians, overthrow the U.S. government and Constitution, establish a Caliphate, and impose sharia law upon the Land of the (formerly) Free. Even words like “caliphate” and “sharia” were unknown in their benighted circles... This has now changed one hundred eighty degrees.

Christians are not the only problem.   Lately, some rightwing Zionists have taken to championing Islamophobia too, creatively adapting many of the tropes of classical anti-Semitism to this end.

Jewish Islamophobia is a bastard offspring of the Zionist colonial project, but it should not be confused with settlers’ attitudes towards those Arabs, Muslim and Christian, whose land they coveted. In despising the indigenous peoples they dispossess, Zionists were, and still are, like colonists everywhere.

They therefore have never had much love for Arabs, or vice versa. "

He continues, "For the most part, though, Zionists respected Islam, and had no quarrel with Muslims generally. There are deep historical reasons for this. Until well into the modern era, Jews fared better in Muslim lands than in Christendom, and Muslims have always accorded the Jewish religion more respect than Christians did. The feeling was reciprocated.

But with Islamophobia on the rise in the West, and with Israel as dependent as ever on Western, especially American, military and diplomatic support, it seems to have occurred to Israel’s leaders, and therefore to its most zealous and retrograde supporters abroad, that it wouldn’t hurt to jump aboard the Islamophobia bandwagon."

Foreign policy gurus, fundamentalist Christian preachers, and Zionists struggling to keep public opinion on Israel’s side have all contributed to the rise of modern Islamophobia. What a hodgepodge! But they all have at least one thing in common: opportunism.

To read more, click here.

Prof. Richard Falk's article - Slouching Toward Global Disaster

Richard Falk is an American professor Emeritus of International Law at Princeton University. He just completed a six-year term as United Nations Special Rapporteur on Palestinian human rights. His article - Slouching Toward Global Disaster - has just appeared in the Counterpunch.org. He begins, "There are many disturbing signs that the West is creating conditions in the Middle East and Asia that could produce a wider war, most likely a new Cold War, containing, as well, menacing risks of World War III. " And he concludes, "Imaginative diplomacy, talking and listening to the enemy, and engaging in self-scrutiny remains outside the cast iron cage of the military mentality that has long dominated most of the political space in American foreign policy debates with the conspicuous help of the passive aggressive mainstream media. In this respect, American democracy is a broken reality, and conscientious citizens must look elsewhere as a prison break of the political imagination is long overdue."
It is a must read for anyone interested in learning about the root causes behind some of the messy events of our time. 
Falk is an associate at the Transnational Foundation for Future Research, where this essay originally appeared.