Archive for April 15th, 2008

US goes for the jugular in Pakistan: Times of India

April 15, 2008

Tuesday, April 15, 2008

 

Comments posted on Time of India Website article: US goes for the jugular in Pakistan

 

 

 

“There is a grave lesson for Indian leaders, who should not rejoice in their neighbour Pakistan’s plight but think about their own future with a rogue state as their supposedly strategic partner. India is bound to suffer the same fate, if it is not careful. It must rise above local petty politics of the communal colouring and think about the overall future of the subcontinent as an independent identity and not give in to US arm twisting. US nuclear deal was nothing but arm twisting in disguise. One way or other, US wants to subjugate India and make India its colony, to exploit its resources, its people and its prestige around the world. Indian leaders have a sacred duty to safeguard all three. India must launch a preemptive ‘Quite Asia’ movement against the US warmongers.

 

 

Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai

<ghulammuhammed3@gmail.com>

www.GhulamMuhammed.wordpress.com

 

——————————————————–

 

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/US_wants_access_to_Paks_N-assets/articleshow/2951475.cms#write

 

US goes for the jugular in Pakistan

 

15 Apr 2008, 0030 hrs IST

, Chidanand Rajghatta , TNN

 

 

WASHINGTON: Finally acknowledging that Pakistan represents a clear and present danger to American and world security

, the Bush administration is trying to get a stranglehold on the country’s nuclear weapons.

In the latest move, Washington has sought direct access to Pakistan’s Nuclear Command Authority by posting an officer at the US embassy in Islamabad to liaise with the body that controls the country’s nuclear weapons.

The demand, first reported in Pakistani newspapers Jang and News, comes even as US president George Bush

said in a TV interview on the weekend that a future 9/11 kind of attack would most likely emanate from Pakistan, not Afghanistan.

Bush and high-ranking US officials had previously glossed over Pakistan’s role as the hub

of world terror while targeting Iraq.

Most major terror attacks in the world have emanated from Pakistan, and not from the usual US suspects like Iran, Iraq and Syria.

The US administration’s attempts to get a stranglehold on Pakistan’s nuclear weapons show that Washington now appears to have come out in the open about a country that has long been described by many analysts as the most dangerous place on earth and the ground zero of world terror.

Ironically, the change in the American thinking comes even as Pakistan’s vibrant civil society has forced a course correction by jettisoning a US-backed militaristic government in favour of a more democratic dispensation.

Although Washington appears to harbour more doubts about the new democratic government than about the previous military junta it allied with, its efforts to get a handle on Pakistan’s security predates the gradual transfer of power.

The latest attempt to get a fix on Pakistan’s nuclear assets

is the 12th in a series of demands aimed at establishing greater US oversight on what many commentators see as a dangerously unstable country. Last month, Washington issued a set of 11 demands that shocked Pakistan’s security establishment, which described it as highly intrusive and untenable.

The demands included allowing US personnel to enter Pakistan on the basis of national identity (like driver’s licence) and forgoing visas; accepting US licences, including arms licences, in Pakistan; US personnel being allowed to bear arms and wear their uniforms in Pakistan; application

of US criminal jurisdiction on American personnel in Pakistan etc.

Pakistan’s defence ministry, the foreign office and the law ministry were reported to have rejected the demands outright.

Pakistan’s security mavens have gone ballistic over the US security bear hug.

“The first step in dealing rationally with our indigenous terrorist problem holistically and credibly is to create space between ourselves and the US. As the US adage goes: ‘There is no free lunch.’ For Pakistan, lunching with the US has become unacceptably costly,” wrote Shireen Mazari, who heads the Pakistan Institute of Strategic Studies.

While Mazari wants Islamabad to punish the US by denying it access to Afghanistan, other analysts point out that Pakistan will be toast within weeks without US financial and institutional support.

According to reports from Pakistan, the new request for an NCA liaison was made through verbal contact via an assistant secretary-level official.

Elizabeth Colton, the US embassy spokesperson in Islamabad, did not deny outright the story but told the Pakistani media: “We are in touch with all elements of the Pakistan government all the time. But we do not publish or discuss details of our diplomatic discussions and assignments.”

 

 

Advertisements

Comments posted on Dr. Daniel Pipes’ website article: Europe or Eurobia

April 15, 2008

Tuesday, April 15, 2008

 

Comments posted on Dr. Daniel Pipes’ website: http://www.danielpipes.org/article/5516

It can be interpreted as a symbol of modesty that Dr. Pipes has completely left out the role of the Jewish community, in the past, present and future. It will not be an exaggeration to bring out the fact that the Jewish community has been in the background of the major world developments as promoters, conceptualizers, funders, propagators. By keeping that historical potential to affect the future world events, be that in Europe or world wide, as something unmentionable, by default or by design, is not doing full justice to an open and frank academic discussion. 

While the role of Christian West is discussed in all the three possible scenarios, the role of Jewish community, that has always remained in the forefront of so many of world’s many a historical twists and turns, should be brought in as a major factor in not only forecasting of the future, but in fashioning of the future.

As I could make out, as a lay person, Muslims around the world do not have any grand design for either their community or the world at large. Of course, in theory, they do possess a formidable store of alternatives available to refashion the society. But there is no sign that they have any plans to take over the traditional world dominating role of European and American nation-states that is once again now bent around consolidating its nationalist identities, as a safeguard against the so-called new Islamic imperialism.

As Dr. Pipes has mentioned in his recounting of various scenarios, that many do perceive a heavy element of scaremongering into the future forecasting and the role of Islam, Islam and Muslim presence in the West, could be exploited for consolidation of western society in its traditional garb, that earlier was fraught with racism, wars and mass destructions.

If the new century is to avoid the death and destruction of the past century, an active co-existence policy should be the benchmark of all our peaceful endeavors. And Jewish community has much to contribute towards that peace, it it so chooses.

 

Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai

<ghulammuhammed3@gmail.com>

<www.GhulamMuhammed.wordpress.com>

 

—————————————————————–

http://www.danielpipes.org/article/5516

 

Europe or Eurabia?

by Daniel Pipes
Australian
April 15, 2008

Print

Send

Comment

RSS

Share:    

The future of Europe is in play. Will it turn into “Eurabia,” a part of the Muslim world? Will it remain the distinct cultural unit it has been over the last millennium? Or might there be some creative synthesis of the two civilizations?

The answer has vast importance. Europe may constitute a mere 7 percent of the world’s landmass but for five hundred years, 1450-1950, for good and ill, it was the global engine of change. How it develops in the future will affect all humanity, and especially daughter countries such as Australia which still retain close and important ties to the old continent.

I foresee potentially one of three paths for Europe: Muslims dominating, Muslims rejected, or harmonious integration.

(1) Muslim domination strikes some analysts as inevitable. Oriana Fallaci found that “Europe becomes more and more a province of Islam, a colony of Islam.” Mark Steyn argues that much of the Western world “will not survive the twenty-first century, and much of it will effectively disappear within our lifetimes, including many if not most European countries.” Such authors point to three factors leading to Europe’s Islamization: faith, demography, and a sense of heritage.

The secularism that predominates in Europe, especially among its elites, leads to alienation about the Judeo-Christian tradition, empty church pews, and a fascination with Islam. In complete contrast, Muslims display a religious fervor that translates into jihadi sensibility, a supremacism toward non-Muslims, and an expectation that Europe is waiting for conversion to Islam.

The contrast in faith also has demographic implications, with Christians having on average 1.4 children per woman, or about one third less than the number needed to maintain their population, and Muslims enjoying a dramatically higher, if falling, fertility rate. Amsterdam and Rotterdam are expected to be in about 2015 the first large majority-Muslim cities. Russia could become a Muslim-majority country in 2050. To employ enough workers to fund existing pension plans, Europe needs millions of immigrants and these tend to be disproportionately Muslim due to reasons of proximity, colonial ties, and the turmoil in majority-Muslim countries.

In addition, many Europeans no longer cherish their history, mores, and customs. Guilt about fascism, racism, and imperialism leave many with a sense that their own culture has less value than that of immigrants. Such self-disdain has direct implications for Muslim immigrants, for if Europeans shun their own ways, why should immigrants adopt them? When added to the already-existing Muslim hesitations over much that is Western, and especially what concerns sexuality, the result are Muslim populations that strongly resist assimilation.

The logic of this first path leads to Europe ultimately becoming an extension of North Africa.

(2) But the first path is not inevitable. Indigenous Europeans could resist it and as they make up 95 percent of the continent’s population, they can at any time reassert control, should they see Muslims posing a threat to a valued way of life.

This impulse can already be seen at work in the French anti-hijab legislation or in Geert Wilders’ film, Fitna. Anti-immigrant parties gain in strength; a potential nativist movement is taking shape across Europe, as political parties opposed to immigration focus increasingly on Islam and Muslims. These parties include the British National Party, Belgium’s Vlaamse Belang, France’s Front National, the Austrian Freedom Party, the Party for Freedom in the Netherlands, the Danish People’s Party, and the Swedish Democrats.

They will likely continue to grow as immigration surges ever higher, with mainstream parties paying and expropriating their anti-Islamic message. Should nationalist parties gain power, they will likely seek to reject multiculturalism, cut back on immigration, encourage repatriation of immigrants, support Christian institutions, increase indigenous European birthrates, and broadly attempt to re-establish traditional ways.

Muslim alarm will likely follow. American author Ralph Peters sketches a scenario in which “U.S. Navy ships are at anchor and U.S. Marines have gone ashore at Brest, Bremerhaven or Bari to guarantee the safe evacuation of Europe’s Muslims.” Peters concludes that because of European’s “ineradicable viciousness,” its Muslims “are living on borrowed time” As Europeans have “perfected genocide and ethnic cleansing,” Muslims, he predicts, “will be lucky just to be deported,” rather than killed. Indeed, Muslims worry about just such a fate; since the 1980s, they have spoken overtly about Muslims being sent to gas chambers.

Violence by indigenous Europeans cannot be precluded but nationalist efforts will more likely take place less violently; if any one is likely to initiate violence, it is the Muslims. They have already engaged in many acts of violence and seem to be spoiling for more. Surveys indicate, for instance, that about 5 percent of British Muslims endorse the 7/7 transport bombings. In brief, a European reassertion will likely lead to on-going civil strife, perhaps a more lethal version of the fall 2005 riots in France.

(3) The ideal outcome has indigenous Europeans and immigrant Muslims finding a way to live together harmoniously and create a new synthesis. A 1991 study, La France, une chance pour l’Islam (France, an Opportunity for Islam) by Jeanne-Hélène Kaltenbach and Pierre Patrick Kaltenbach promoted this idealistic approach. Despite all, this optimism remains the conventional wisdom, as suggested by an Economist leader of 2006 that concluded that dismissed for the moment at least, the prospect of Eurabia as “scaremongering.”

This is the view of most politicians, journalists, and academics but it has little basis in reality. Yes indigenous Europeans could yet rediscover their Christian faith, make more babies, and again cherish their heritage. Yes, they could encourage non-Muslim immigration and acculturate Muslims already living in Europe. Yes, Muslim could accept historic Europe. But not only are such developments not now underway, their prospects are dim. In particular, young Muslims are cultivating grievances and nursing ambitions at odds with their neighbors.

One can virtually dismiss from consideration the prospect of Muslims accepting historic Europe and integrating within it. U.S. columnist Dennis Prager agrees: “It is difficult to imagine any other future scenario for Western Europe than its becoming Islamicized or having a civil war.”

But which of those two remaining paths will the continent take? Forecasting is difficult because crisis has not yet struck. But it may not be far off. Within a decade perhaps, the continent’s evolution will become clear as the Europe-Muslim relationship takes shape.

The unprecedented nature of Europe’s situation also renders a forecast exceedingly difficult. Never in history has a major civilization peaceably dissolved, nor has a people ever risen to reclaim its patrimony. Europe’s unique circumstances make them difficult to comprehend, tempting to overlook, and virtually impossible to predict. With Europe, we all enter into terra incognita.

Mr. Pipes is director of the Middle East Forum and Taube/Diller distinguished visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University. He is in Australia for the Intelligence Squared debate to take place this evening in Sydney. This article derives from a talk he delivered yesterday to the Quadrant.