Tag Archive | "political leader"

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Muhammad – The Most Influential Man in History

Posted on 09 February 2012 by Tea Server



My choice of Muhammad to lead the list of the world’s most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular levels. Of humble origins, Muhammad founded and promulgated one of the world’s great religions, and became an immensely effective political leader. 

Today, thirteen centuries after his death, his influence is still powerful and pervasive. The majority of the persons in this book had the advantage of being born and raised in centers of civilization, highly cultured or politically pivotal nations. Muhammad, however, was born in the year 570, in the city of Mecca, in southern Arabia, at that time a backward area of the world, far from the centers of trade, art, and learning. 

Orphaned at age six, he was reared in modest surroundings. Islamic tradition tells us that he was illiterate. His economic position improved when, at age twenty-five, he married a wealthy widow. Nevertheless, as he approached forty, there was little outward indication that he was a remarkable person. 

Most Arabs at that time were pagans, who believed in many gods. There were, however, in Mecca, a small number of Jews and Christians; it was from them no doubt that Muhammad first learned of a single, omnipotent God who ruled the entire universe. When he was forty years old, Muhammad became convinced that this one true God (Allah) was speaking to him, and had chosen him to spread the true faith. 

For three years, Muhammad preached only to close friends and associates. Then, about 613, he began preaching in public. As he slowly gained converts, the Meccan authorities came to consider him a dangerous nuisance. In 622, fearing for his safety, Muhammad fled to Medina (a city some 200 miles north of Mecca), where he had been offered a position of considerable political power. 

This flight, called the Hegira, was the turning point of the Prophet’s life. In Mecca, he had had few followers. In Medina, he had many more, and he soon acquired an influence that made him a virtual dictator. During the next few years, while Muhammad’s following grew rapidly, a series of battles were fought between Medina and Mecca. This was ended in 630 with Muhammad’s triumphant return to Mecca as conqueror. The remaining two and one-half years of his life witnessed the rapid conversion of the Arab tribes to the new religion.


When Muhammad died, in 632, he was the effective ruler of all of southern Arabia. The Bedouin tribesmen of Arabia had a reputation as fierce warriors. But their number was small; and plagued by disunity and internecine warfare, they had been no match for the larger armies of the kingdoms in the settled agricultural areas to the north. However, unified by Muhammad for the first time in history, and inspired by their fervent belief in the one true God, these small Arab armies now embarked upon one of the most astonishing series of conquests in human history. To the northeast of Arabia lay the large Neo-Persian Empire of the Sassanids; to the northwest lay the Byzantine, or Eastern Roman Empire, centered in Constantinople. Numerically, the Arabs were no match for their opponents. On the field of battle, though, the inspired Arabs rapidly conquered all of Mesopotamia, Syria, and Palestine. By 642, Egypt had been wrested from the Byzantine Empire, while the Persian armies had been crushed at the key battles of Qadisiya in 637, and Nehavend in 642. But even these enormous conquests, which were made under the leadership of Muhammad’s close friends and immediate successors, Ali, Abu Bakr and ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab, did not mark the end of the Arab advance. By 711, the Arab armies had swept completely across North Africa to the Atlantic Ocean There they turned north and, crossing the Strait of Gibraltar, overwhelmed the Visigothic kingdom in Spain.

For a while, it must have seemed that the Moslems would overwhelm all of Christian Europe. However, in 732, at the famous Battle of Tours, a Moslem army, which had advanced into the center of France, was at last defeated by the Franks. Nevertheless, in a scant century of fighting, these Bedouin tribesmen, inspired by the word of the Prophet, had carved out an empire stretching from the borders of India to the Atlantic Ocean-the largest empire that the world had yet seen. And everywhere that the armies conquered, large-scale conversion to the new faith eventually followed. Now, not all of these conquests proved permanent. The Persians, though they have remained faithful to the religion of the Prophet, have since regained their independence from the Arabs. And in Spain, more than seven centuries of warfare, finally resulted in the Christians reconquering the entire peninsula. However, Mesopotamia and Egypt, the two cradles of ancient civilization, have remained Moslem, as has the entire coast of North Africa. The new religion, of course, continued to spread, in the intervening centuries, far beyond the borders of the original Moslem conquests. Currently it has tens of millions of adherents in Africa and Central Asia and even more in Pakistan and northern India, and in Indonesia. In Indonesia, the new faith has been a unifying factor. In the Indian subcontinent, however, the conflict between Moslems and Hindus is still a major obstacle to unity.

How, then, is one to assess the overall impact of Muhammad on human history? Like all religions, Islam exerts an enormous influence upon the lives of its followers. It is for this reason that the founders of the world’s great religions all figure prominently in this book. Since there are roughly twice as many Christians as Moslems in the world, it may initially seem strange that Muhammad has been ranked higher than Jesus. There are two principal reasons for that decision. First, Muhammad played a far more important role in the development of Islam than Jesus did in the development of Christianity. Although Jesus was responsible for the main ethical and moral precepts of Christianity (insofar as these differed from Judaism), St. Paul was the main developer of Christian theology, its principal proselytizer, and the author of a large portion of the New Testament. Muhammad, however, was responsible for both the theology of Islam and its main ethical and moral principles. In addition, he played the key role in proselytizing the new faith, and in establishing the religious practices of Islam. Moreover, he is the author of the Moslem holy scriptures, the Koran, a collection of certain of Muhammad’s insights that he believed had been directly revealed to him by Allah. Most of these utterances were copied more or less faithfully during Muhammad’s lifetime and were collected together in authoritative form not long after his death. The Koran therefore, closely represents Muhammad’s ideas and teachings and to a considerable extent his exact words. No such detailed compilation of the teachings of Christ has survived. Since the Koran is at least as important to Moslems as the Bible is to Christians, the influence of Muhammad through the medium of the Koran has been enormous. It is probable that the relative influence of Muhammad on Islam has been larger than the combined influence of Jesus Christ and St. Paul on Christianity.

On the purely religious level, then, it seems likely that Muhammad has been as influential in human history as Jesus. Furthermore, Muhammad (unlike Jesus) was a secular as well as a religious leader. In fact, as the driving force behind the Arab conquests, he may well rank as the most influential political leader of all time. Of many important historical events, one might say that they were inevitable and would have occurred even without the particular political leader who guided them. For example, the South American colonies would probably have won their independence from Spain even if Simon Bolivar had never lived. But this cannot be said of the Arab conquests. Nothing similar had occurred before Muhammad, and there is no reason to believe that the conquests would have been achieved without him. The only comparable conquests in human history are those of the Mongols in the thirteenth century, which were primarily due to the influence of Genghis Khan. These conquests, however, though more extensive than those of the Arabs, did not prove permanent, and today the only areas occupied by the Mongols are those that they held prior to the time of Genghis Khan. It is far different with the conquests of the Arabs. From Iraq to Morocco, there extends a whole chain of Moslem nations united not merely by their faith in Islam, but also by their Arabic language, history, and culture.

The centrality of the Koran in the Moslem religion and the fact that it is written in Arabic have probably prevented the Arab language from breaking up into mutually unintelligible dialects, which might otherwise have occurred in the intervening thirteen centuries. Differences and divisions between these Arab states exist, of course, and they are considerable, but the partial disunity should not blind us to the important elements of unity that have continued to exist. For instance, neither Iran nor Indonesia, both oil-producing states and both Islamic in religion joined in the oil embargo of the winter of 1973-74. It is no coincidence that all of the Arab states, and only the Arab states, participated in the embargo. We see, then, that the Arab conquests of the seventh century have continued to play an important role in human history, down to the present day. It is this unparalleled combination of secular and religious influence which I feel entitles Muhammad to be considered the most influential single figure in human history

**********

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Jinnah and the Ahmadi Muslims

Posted on 08 February 2012 by Tea Server

This is a brief comment on Saroop Ijaz’s otherwise brilliant article in Express Tribune.

Good news is that Saroop Ijaz has woken up to the Ahmadi issue. Bad news is that what he finds irksome is not as much the mistreatment or discrimination but that those who choose to speak against this discrimination choose to do so in Jinnah’s name. Tragic that not everyone is as well educated as Saroop Ijaz to produce references of obscure authors at a drop of a hat.

Here it must be stated that Jinnah’s relevance to Ahmadi case is not limited to piddling subsection of his career such as his championing unpopular causes like child marriages restraint act or his efforts to legalize inter-communal marriage without renunciation of faith or his warnings against the misuse of 295-A, grandfather clause to 295-c. No Jinnah’s relevance has to do with the fact that he was last popular political leader who said that Ahmadis were Muslims and no one had the right to say otherwise. His relevance is that he resisted all demands by the Mullahs to expel Ahmadis from the League. Indeed the Majlis e Ahrar started its anti-ahmaddiya campaign partly to discredit Jinnah and as an election slogan.

This is precisely why the Munir Report dedicates an entire section to Jinnah’s Pakistan. Maybe their lordships Munir and Kayani were not as educated as Mr Ijaz.

Syndicated from: Pak Tea House

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Target killings in Gilgit-Baltistan

Posted on 21 January 2012 by Tea Server

By Dr. Zaeem Zia

Pakistan in my opinion is a bundle of strange contradictions. We always beat the drums and propagate tyranny of Indian and Israeli forces for what is happening in Kashmir and Palestine and yet are criminally negligent of things which are happening on our own soil.

Gilgit-Baltistan is my home town and  is strategically located in an important region and lies right in the middle of four nuclear powers, India, China, Pakistan, and Tajikistan. There used to be a time when it was a tourist heaven but now it has turned into a hell on earth. Peace and fraternity was our identity, but random killings are a routine
tradition in Gilgit now. Our ancestors were once famous for brotherhood, and now the progeny has turned into worst enemies based on sectarian issues.

The question arises, as who is responsible for all the bloodshed in Gilgit-Baltistan? What makes people of Gilgit-Baltistan to grab weapons against each other? And what is so difficult for the security agencies to get hold of miscreant trouble shooters?

Gilgit-Baltistan has 6000 police force, elite force, quick response force (QRF),   Rangers, a whole Military division comprising of three brigades. Apart from these, ISI, MI, and other intelligence have their best networks in the region compared to other parts of the country. Almost 22 intelligence and law enforcement agencies work in this area and yet fail to control the situation and to track the miscreants even in the Gilgit City alone.

The major troublesome area is Gilgit City, which is no more than 5 kilometers in  length and barely three kilometers in width. The total population in this small city is scarcely 150,000. Technically, it should be easy to handle the miscreants with iron hands, but practically it is not happening. The question rises, whose fault is it?

Some  quarters have publically announced on record and threatened that unless the present PPP Government is forced to leave and the present Chief Minister  and the Governor  are removed, peace cannot prevail in the whole region.

Consequently the region is under constant terror and people are being assassinated on the streets and at times right next to the security bunkers. For example  Syed Zia Ud Din Rizvi (most influential religious scholar), Dr. Sher Wali (a professional doctor) , Saif Ur Rehman Khan (a political leader), Asad Zaidi, (Deputy Speaker of GB Assembly), and Ramzan Danish (a renowned businessman, and a political leader ) have been assassinated. Once again a simple question can be asked: Why can’t it be controlled by our security agencies?

Streets are haunted from the fear of assassination; economy is almost zero; tourism, due to the violence, is record low, educational institutions barely work, offices are shut and hospitals, post offices and other departments are divided on sectarian basis and to top it off there are no go areas.

There is such uncertainty that anyone can get assassinated anytime, anywhere- There have been more than 600 killings over 5 years. Who will be responsible for their children? They are now orphans for the rest of their lives? Who will compensate for their miseries in the rest of their lives? Almost every other home bears a widow, helpless and without support and lack of justice? The favorite prey of the terrorists are either the most learned, influential or prominent political figures.

It is the need of the time to focus on the strategies to tackle the highly volatile situation in Gilgit- or else the situation will get worse  and uncontrollable. Writ of law should prevail, more rigorous legislation on security issues should be done, and instead of making “aman Jirgas” the miscreants should be dealt with an iron hand and made an example in front of others. Rather than raising fingers at our nascent legislative structure, we should help them flourish.  And I urge youngsters to take part in the peace process and intra-faith harmony.

Gilgit-Baltistan Zindabad, Pakistan Payindabad

 

Syndicated from: Pak Tea House

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

An open letter to Imran Khan from a supporter

Posted on 01 January 2012 by Tea Server

Dear Mr. Khan,

I write to you as your supporter and well-wisher. You have provided us with hope after a very long time and having desperately clutched at it, I am unwilling to to let you be squandered, like Bhutto and his daughter before you. Hence I address to you this letter.

Khan sb! Zardari and Nawaz Sharif are pygmies atop big political parties. They are incompetent, corrupt and self serving. Yet as I look at the state of our nation,  I do not feel threatened by them. Democratic process was going to deal with them and your growing popularity and almost certain victory in the next elections shows that one cannot fool all the people all the time. As a Pakistani who believes in Jinnah’s Pakistan I feel threatened rather by a certain line of thinking – a line of thinking that still believes that the military has a role to play in Pakistani politics, that ISI and GHQ should hold a veto against corrupt politicians, and that some how the Pakistan Army is defender of some arbitrary ideological frontier of the country.  Sadly many of our fellow travellers in the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf also subscribe to this view. The truth is that so long as this mindset prevails, no political leader no matter how well intentioned or honest will be able to dent the systemic failure which affects the democratic process in this country.  I fear that you will be marginalised by these people in the PTI and ultimately you will fall and after you there shall be the flood or Tsunami of a kind that you do not envisage.

The second thing I feel particularly pinched about is the existence of an insulated inward-looking isolationalist Islamic nationalism within the PTI ranks. If you wish to build an egalitarian, modern and prosperous welfare state, then this particular sentiment will be an insurmountable roadblock in your way. Forget the great debate about Islamic v. Secular. The real question is do you want a Pakistan that is a theocratic and closed insulated society or do you want a Pakistan that in some way resembles the social welfare model that Scandinivian countries have successfully implemented. In other words do you want the Pakistan favoured by the religious right where everyone other than a Hanafi Sunni Muslim is a Kafir and a second class citizen or do you want the Pakistan once – perhaps naively- imagined  by Jinnah as a state which would treat all citizens of the state equally without consideration of personal belief and where faith would be personal matter and not a matter of public inquiry and inquisition. This is not about the small “liberal” class or the large Pakistani class. This is not about wanting Shariah or not wanting Shariah- this is much more fundamental. This is about Insaf itself. 

In this regard perhaps you should look towards Teyyip Reccip Erdogan. No one can question the fact that he is one of the finest leaders in the Muslim World today. You yourself have praised him and put him up as a model. He comes from a populist Islamist base. Yet he is firmly a secularist.  His prescription for Egypt recently – blasted by Muslim Brotherhood and the like- is a secular democratic constitution that is impartial towards the considerations of faith. To Erdogan, Turkish secularism is perfectly compatible with Islam and Shariah. Erdogan does not pit secularism against Islam. Erdogan believes in religious freedom and equality for all citizens of Turkey. This is keeping with the finest traditions of Islam from its earliest period where Islam preserved religious pluralism of the areas Islam conquered.  You should, skipper, follow the example set by Erdogan for that is the only way forward for our time. It may also appeal to you know that Allama Iqbal was not particularly opposed to this idea either. In his lecture on the principle of movement in Islam Allama Iqbal writes:

“They therefore reject old ideas about the function of State and Religion, and accentuate the separation of State and Religion. Now the structure of Islam as a religio-political system, no doubt, does permit such a view.”

 It is time for you, Khan sb, to pick up from where Iqbal ended. Iqbal gave hope to a Muslim minority in the great subcontinent. Had he lived beyond the creation of Pakistan, he no doubt would have endorsed the idea of a inclusive and pluralistic Pakistani polity that Jinnah articulated.  In addition to Iqbal therefore it is time you also paid some attention to Faiz and Jalib, who incidentally was the first one to describe you as Pakistan’s great hope in his poem dedicated to you.  Faiz- a devout follower of Iqbal- was the next stage in our national evolution. You must embody this evolution of a Pakistan that is in tune with humanity and universalism.  That is what Iqbal would have wanted.

The task before you is great. The forces of reaction and radicalism that are in your ranks have to be dealt with. You cannot speak of a progressive Pakistan and also send a note to Jamaat-ud-Dawa rally in Lahore.  You cannot on the one hand rightly condemn Mumtaz Qadri and then have Ejaz Chaudhry represent you at the free Qadri rally.  Imran Khan sb please choose, so that we may also not be under illusions about anything. Enough with the ambiguity and doublespeak,  it certainly does not fit in with your personality and character. Remember these fascists and reactionaries that you seek to appease will tomorrow target you – as they targetted Jinnah, Zafrulla, Bhutto and Abdus Salam in the past.  Don’t forget that a section of these fascists beat you up at the PU campus four years ago. So it is time you decide whether you are going to continue to appease them or are you going to make an effort towards making PTI a truly inclusive and democratic Pakistani political party committed to a plural and progressive Pakistan.

Yours sincerely,

Yasser Latif Hamdani

A supporter and a well-wisher.

Syndicated from: Pak Tea House

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Imran Khan: Unleash the Figurative Tsunami

Posted on 28 December 2011 by Tea Server

Photo: Express/Shaheryar Popalzai

This past Sunday was Christmas Day, PML-N leader Nawaz Sharif‘s birthday, and the 135th birth anniversary of Mohammed Ali Jinnah, the father of Pakistan.

This past Sunday was also Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (“Movement for Justice”)’s much-anticipated political rally in Karachi. For those of us not physically at the Minar-e-Quaid (Jinnah’s Mausoleum), the PTI jalsa was cause to gather at friends’ houses, tweet feverishly, and offer sideline commentary to no one in particular. Or maybe that was just me.

By this time, you have undoubtedly read a flurry of news coverage on said jalsa. But for those who haven’t, here is the rundown. PTI leader Imran Khan – the oft-labeled “cricketer-turned-politician” – has gained much political traction and popularity in the last year, after launching his political party officially in 1996. Fahad Desmukh, in his radio piece for PRI’s The World, noted,

The PTI attracted mostly urban educated professionals, but failed to get a mainstream following. In fact, in the 2002 parliamentary elections, Imran Khan was the only candidate from his party to win a seat…But now Khan has managed to mobilize enough young urban professionals to become a rising political force. In the past, this demographic shunned politics as a dishonorable activity. But young people are coming out now out of frustration with the current leadership.

Last month, PTI’s jalsa in Lahore garnered between 100,000 to 200,000 supporters – one of the largest political rallies in the country. This past Sunday, thousands of people came out on the streets of Karachi. Although PTI estimated the number at 500,000, news agencies report that the number in attendance was closer to 100,000, still making it one of the largest rallies in Karachi in recent years. Mutahir Ahmed, a professor at the University of Karachi, told Dawn, “He is riding a wave of popular politics right now. There is a lot of frustration among ordinary people, as well as political workers right now, which he is cashing on.”

In an article for the Express Tribune entitled, “Imran Khan Wins Hearts & Minds at Karachi Rally,” Shaheryar Mirza and Saad Hasan interviewed one rally attendee, who said, “I don’t know why but Imran Khan gives me hope. I want change, security and a better future for my children.”

Ah, the psychological underpinnings of hope and change. We saw it work with the Obama 2008 presidential campaign, and leveraged again by Afghanistan’s Abdullah Abdullah during his recent presidential run.  It’s the promise of something different. And though it may just be semantics, words like hope and change induce positive associations with absolute ideals of happiness, progress, and prosperity.  For a fatigued and frustrated Pakistani populace, that is a fuzzy but welcome option.

I don’t claim to be an expert on our political system (I actually don’t claim to be an expert on anything), but I have been fascinated with the perceived rise of PTI & Imran Khan in recent months. Here are a few observations both on the lead-up to the December 25th jalsa, the rally itself, and subsequent reactions post-rally.

  1. PTI Snakes on a Plane: You have to give it to Tehreek-e-Insaf. They know how to market their vision to urban masses & millennials alike. Prior to the Dec 25th jalsa, the party generated buzz by launching a telemarketing scheme akin to Snakes on a Plane (if you received a phone call from Samuel L. Jackson telling you about those mother**** snakes on the mother**** plane, then you know what I’m talkin’ about). Many Karachiites received a 30-second phone call from Imran Khan inviting them to the rally. Although the call was pre-recorded, many almost believed they were receiving a personal call from the man himself. Insert swoons here. The strategy is a reflection on the party’s overarching marketing approach – the use of choice words (hope, change & the like), leveraging social media, telemarketing all enforce a broader theme: Imran Khan & PTI offer something new, something approachable, something hip, something different from the status quo.
  2. Imran Khan Cricket Hero, Imran Khan Politican = Same, Same: I don’t think I’ve ever heard so many cricket analogies. Oh my goodness. In a BBC interview prior to the jalsa he noted, “It’s like playing a World Cup final…this could be a defining moment in Pakistan.” In the lead-up to the rally, Imran reportedly called PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif a club cricketer “flexing muscles with a Test cricketer.” The list goes on. And while I think cricket & “tsunami” references could form its own drinking (coke! hee!) game, the analogies further raise positive associations of Imran circa 1992 World Cup. Imran the politician + Imran cricket hero = Imran heroic politician.
  3. Rally like it’s a Britney Spears Concert: When the band-formerly-known-as-Junoon’s lead singer Salman Ahmed started singing Junoon songs, all I could think was, Wow he sounds just like Ali Azmat! And then I realized he was lip-synching. It was, in fact, Ali Azmat. Such a Britney move, dude. In their post on the rally, Cafe Pyala noted, “With more ‘heavyweights’ joining, PTI youth may have to live with the fact that the music has died with the Lahore jalsa.”
  4. PTI – Stragglers Welcome: Ahsan over at Five Rupees had a great post on the politicians who have crossed over from their own parties to join PTI, and what it all means: “…when the potential for success for [insert party here] ticket goes down, and PTI’s chances of success go up, we’re more likely to see politicians from [insert party here] to leave for the PTI,” though this may not be the case for MQM or Jamaat-e-Islami (JI). The new additions to PTI are relative heavyweights, including Javed Hashmi from PML-N & Shah Mehmood Qureshi from PPP. Before watching the jalsa, I thought they were sure to help PTI’s clout. But then I watched SMQ talking like a wannabe Shakespeare (community) theater actor about nuclear policy during the rally, and am now grumpy and undecided.
  5. Insecurity is the Best Form of Flattery: You can tell other political parties (namely the PPP & PML-N) are beginning to feel threatened when they start resorting to petty mudslinging and banding together. PM Gilani, who reportedly also made a statement that Zardari was actually younger than Imran, also told media outlets, “Those people who are talking of revolution – are there any new people among the revolutionaries or are they mostly those who wanted to bring revolution along with Musharraf?” Curiously absent from those critiques – the MQM. Curious indeed.

(Express Image) Gilani: Bhai, your plugs may need some sprucing up. Look who we're up against. Nawaz: Curse those gorgeous locks of hair. Curses!

Don’t get me wrong. I’ve been impressed with the perceived meteoric rise of Imran & his party. His speech, especially in comparison with the other speeches at the jalsa, was powerful & hit all the right notes – from wishing Pakistani Christians a Merry Christmas to addressing the Balochistan issue. And though the PTI Manifesto can and should be a better representation of how PTI aims to do much of what they promise (including, ahem, ending corruption in 90 days! Eee!), I do think Imran has steadily moved away from the days where he stood against everything and for nothing. Does that mean I still have my reservations? Hell yes. Does he really have the establishment on his side and what ramifications will that hold? What does an Islamic Welfare State mean in reality? What does all of this mean in reality?

Every political leader in our country has set out to prove that they can undertake the ideals laid out in Jinnah’s vision. Every leader makes vague promises, tugs on our heart strings that this time, dear citizens, they will be different. The difference with Imran is that he is an option we have not tried before.

Does that merit my vote? I’m still undecided, but at least his campaign has spurred me to vote. You should too.

Other blog posts/related pieces you should read:

A Reluctant Mind – Pedaling Obscurantism (esp. on the female dress issue)

Obama Says Do More – The PTI Rally in Karachi or Democracy is Alive & Well in Pakistan But Not Really

Dawn – Cowasjee’s Open Letter to Imran Khan (from 1996)

Filed under: Op-Eds

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , ,

The Young Benazir Bhutto.

Posted on 27 December 2011 by Tea Server

Benazir Bhutto , the clear foreign policy  leader.
Benazir Bhutto was a  political leader of Pakistan whose charm and charisma swept the people’s vote towards Pakistan Peoples Party in elections all over the country. From Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s dynamic, populist political legacy  to Benazir Bhutto’s determined thrust towards democratic people’s rule we see how this young, Oxford educated leader



Syndicated from: Mehernewspappar

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

War Crimes 2011 Year In Review – Europe & The Americas

Posted on 21 December 2011 by Tea Server

This is the first in a 3-part year in review series on war crimes around the world in 2011.

 

Ratko Mladic – Europe’s Most Wanted War Criminal

In early April Bosiljka Mladic, Ratko Mladic’s wife told the media that her husband was dead. Less than two months later he was arrested in Lazarevo in northern Serbia, ending a 16 year manhunt bringing Europe’s most wanted war criminal to trial. Mladic was the military commander responsible for the Srebrenica massacre in 1995 where 8,000 Bosnian Muslims were killed, and oversaw the years long siege of Sarajevo in which 10,000 civilians were killed. Mladic is currently on trial at the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia in The Hague. The number of charges against Mladic was reduced from 196 to 106 this month in order to expedite justice in light of Mladic’s deteriorating physical condition.

 

Goran Hadzic – The Last Of The Big Three Falls

Goran Hadzic was also captured in northern Serbia this summer where he was rumored to have had sanctuary in an Orthodox monastery. Hadzic was president of the self-proclaimed Serbian Republic of Krajina, located in Croatia mostly along the border with Bosnia and Herzegovina, from 1992-93. He was a political leader of the Serbian rebellion in Croatia beginning in 1991 that lead to the creation of Krajina. Hadzic was indicted by the ICTY for 14 counts of crimes against humanity and war crimes. Hadzic is allegedly responsible for ethnic pogroms in Zagreb and the notorious Ovcara massacre where 250 hospital patients were rounded up from a hospital in Vukovar and mass executed at a local pig farm.  Hadzic was the last of the three war criminals (along with Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic) that the E.U. demanded be brought to justice before considering Serbian assention to the Union.

 

Radovan Karadzic – Building A Case Against Himself

Radovan Karadzic’s trial continued this year as the Bosnian Serb president got the chance to directly address witnesses against him. Karadzic, the political mastermind of the Srebrenica massacre, seemed to implicate bizarre alternative hypotheses concerning events he is being held responsible for – that at the Keraterm concentration camp instead of the hundreds reported to have been massacred, it was only one mentally deranged person that was killed presumably in self-defence; and that the emaciated Fikret Alic pictured in the iconic photograph from Keraterm was just a very skinny man. Karadzic’s former Chief of Crisis Staff, Milan Tupajic was arrested this month and charged with contempt of court for refusing to testify against his former boss.

 

Fatmir Limaj – A Second Chance For Justice

Kosovar MP Fatmir Limaj was arrested following charges by the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo that he was responsible for torture and execution of civilians in the Kleçkë detention camp, and took part in a human organs trafficking ring. He was initially released invoking immunity granted to Kosovar MPs, but a ruling by the Constitutional Court in Kosovo held that the immunity did not extend to acts taken outside of the scope of their official responsibilities and was subsequently placed under house arrest. A previously unnamed key witness against him, Agim Zogaj, was found dead in protective custody in Germany a week after the Constitutional Court’s decision. Zogaj’s death was ruled a suicide. Limaj was acquitted of war crimes charges in 1995 at the ICTY in The Hague.

 

Elderly Nazis – It’s Never Too Late To End Impunity

Former Nazis John Demjanjuk and Heinrich Boere were convicted in Germany for Holocaust related crimes. Demjanjuk served as a prison guard at Sorbibor the Polish concentration camp where 29,000 people were murdered. Heinrich Boere was a part of an assassination squad that murdered Dutch resistance figures.

 

Venezuelan Terrorist Praises Gadhafi At Sentencing Hearing

Carlos ‘The Jackal’ Sanchez was sentenced to a second life sentence in France for bombings there in the early eighties which killed 11. Sanchez has been serving a previous life sentence since 1997, and claims to be responsible for the deaths of 2,000 people in various terrorist attacks throughout the world. Sanchez offered praise of deceased Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi at his sentencing. Gadhafi sponsored much of Sanchez’s terrorist efforts.

 

Former U.S. President Under Increasing International Pressure

Former U.S. President George W. Bush canceled a visit to Switzerland amidst threats of legal action possibly being taken against him for violating the Geneva Conventions by condoning the use of torture by the U.S. military in its ‘War on Terror’. He and Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair were convicted in abenstia for the war crime of aggression at the symbolic Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal in Malaysia in November for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The tribunal has no enforcement power and the U.S. has not ratified the Rome Statute defining the crime of aggression as a war crime. The Rome Statute went into effect in 2002, and the U.K. ratified the Statute in 2001.

 

Zelaya Ouster ‘A Coup’ – H.T.R.C.

The Honduras Truth and Reconciliation Commission ruled that the 2009 ousting of president Manuel Zelaya was an illegal coup. The Commission was established under the auspices of the Organization of American States. Mr. Zelaya returned in May to Honduras from exile in Costa Rica. He is expected to run for president again in 2013.

Next up: War Crimes Year in Review – Asia & Oceania

Comments (0)