Introduction:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/12798195/DJ/IslamRediscovered4.docx
http://AftabKhan-net.blogspot.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *...
SalaamOne , سلام is a nonprofit e-Forum to promote peace among humanity, through understanding and tolerance of religions, cu...
With the emergence of the State, the institution of bureaucracy was set up to administer affairs such as revenue collection, implementation of law, keeping a check on crime and upholding the maintenance of social order, price regulation for commodities and the welfare of people. In the early period of history, it was a custom among rulers to appoint administrative officers from the nobility. This was not based on merit but on the privilege of their birth. The system prevailed in most countries and continued for some time without a major change.
China was the first country to introduce the institution of bureaucracy systematically, which became well-organised and well-disciplined during the Han period. According to the Chinese system, bureaucrats were selected after a meticulous and competitive examination that was open to all classes of society. They were required to study the history of China, teachings of Confucius and the values and norms of morality.
In the first stage, examinations were held in districts throughout China. Those who qualified were allowed to appear in the final examination which was held in the capital. The duration of the examination was three days and the candidates were asked to bring their bedding, food, writing materials and chamber pot. Candidates were allotted a cell where they would spend three days writing answers to the questions. In case of the death of a candidate, his body was taken away from the cell without disturbing other candidates. Copying was strictly prohibited. In one case, an invigilator was beheaded because of negligence of duty.
Those who passed the examination were appointed on high and important posts. They were allowed to wear a special dress and have a carriage for their conveyance. They were married into the nobility in order to integrate them with the ruling classes. This system continued for nearly 2,000 years only to be interrupted by the Mongols who ruled over China and brought their own bureaucrats for administration. Revived again by the Ming dynasty, these bureaucrat scholars were known as mandarins.
Bureaucracy defends the status quo long past the time when the quo has lost its status. — Laurence J. Peter
In Europe, the modern bureaucratic system was introduced by the Prussian government. The administration was divided into different units and trained bureaucrats were appointed to deal with the affairs of each department. The other European governments followed it and instituted competitive examinations for selection of the bureaucrats.
In India, the British government established the Indian Civil Services (ICS) cadre for bureaucrats. The candidates were asked to learn Latin and other classical languages and the subjects of their choice included history, economics, politics and law. The maximum age for the candidate to appear was 20 years.
Despite the regulations, which were aimed at not giving the locals a fair chance, Rabindranath Tagore’s brother passed the examination, bewildering the British government. To ensure that such an incident would not repeat in the future, the government reduced the age from 20 to 18 years. The duration of their service was to be 30 years after which they would be retired. With the passage of time, the colonial rulers had no choice but to hold these examinations in India, so that the Indians could become a part of the colonial bureaucracy.
Hannah Arendt in her book The Origins of Totalitarian State points out that imperialism and bureaucracy were co-related. The example is British India, where 1,000 British bureaucrats administered and managed the affairs of the state in the subcontinent. They were highly paid in order to prevent them from resorting to bribery and corruption. They were honest and responsible officials who served the cause of colonialism with zeal. In India, bureaucracy was sustained and the colonial rule was strengthened by administrative skills.
In Pakistan, we inherited this colonial institution which was specifically designed for foreign rulers to run the administration with an anti-people approach. The same policy continued after partition. Gradually, the competitive examinations lost their validity while influential families would interfere with the process of selection to get appointments for their children and relatives. The institution further deteriorated when the system of lateral entry was introduced and ‘favourites’ were appointed on high posts without a fair judgment of their merits. Retired army officers also have a quota fixed in the civil services.
Consequently, most bureaucrats are not capable of dealing with the complex issues of their departments, their real interest being to obtain privileges and financial benefits that come with their appointment as civil servants. To get promoted, they require recommendations by higher authorities which are only possible through sycophancy and corruption. The institution of bureaucracy has been further ruined by military dictators and inefficient and corrupt politicians. There is a distance between the bureaucrats and people and officials are not interested in either solving the problems of the masses or in their welfare.
History shows us that when government officials become corrupt, inefficient and dishonest, the society faces crisis after crisis without any solution in sight. This is the situation that the Pakistani society confronts presently.
By Mubarak Ali, dawn.com
There’s not a lot of optimism going round the Middle East right now, but if there is one speck of hope it's that in decades to come this may turn out to be the year that something finally shifted on the Israeli-Palestinian front.
I'm aware that such a statement will seem premature. The Israeli government is hugely likely to swing even further right in elections set for spring. The Palestinian president is old and increasingly irrelevant. Israel's aggressive settlement expansion policy shows no sign of slowing. And the two main Palestinian parties seem utterly unable to put together any sort of united front.
But all of this makes the need for a settlement in the next few years even more pressing.
Putting off the issue of Palestinian self-determination undermines those who advocate peaceful negotiations - for what, after nearly 20 years of peace talks, do they have to show for it?
Equally, the lack of progress empowers those who argue that violence is the only salve for the frustration and desperation felt by more than 4 million stateless people - not counting the refugees outside the Palestinian territories.
Finally, there have been clear signs this year that the international community - or to be more specific, Europe - is waking up to this.
The European Parliament's recognition "in principle" of the Palestinian state on Wednesday tops off an unprecedented few months of similar moves across the continent: Sweden’s government officially recognised Palestine in October, while the UK, France, Spain, Ireland and Luxembourg all held symbolic votes that urged their governments to do the same.
In a further slap in the face for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's hawkish government, signatories to the Geneva Convention explicitly called out Israel for violating international humanitarian law by building settlements on occupied territory, while the European Court of Justice temporarily (pending the inevitable appeal) removed Hamas from the bloc's blacklist of terrorist organisations over what it called a legal technicality. And all this in one day.
But Wednesday had a few more surprises before it was over.
Over in New York, the Palestinians managed to overcome intense US opposition to convince Jordan to go ahead with its plan to submit a draft resolution to the United Nations Security Council calling for a negotiated solution to be reached within a year and Israeli security forces to pull out by the end of 2017.
Tellingly, they did not demand the instant vote they were reported to have wanted, instead leaving it open to fiddling, and for good reason: the resolution as it stands has no chance in hell of avoiding the mighty US veto, which for decades has been generously wielded whenever Israel's interests are at risk.
But France, Britain and Germany are working on a softer resolution that not only may prove more amenable to the US, but would also be much harder to veto, coming as it would from two of the UN Security Council's permanent members.
The parameters are expected to be largely the same: some sort of deadline for negotiating a solution to the conflict based on the pre-1967 borders and an end to the Israeli occupation.
The Israelis are likely to slam this too as a "unilateral move" that is being imposed on them, although they will have to tread carefully considering the EU is their biggest trading partner.
But the truth of the matter is that a unilateral solution needs to be imposed. Open-ended negotiations have proven themselves a failed formula, particularly under the stewardship of the US, and the only way forward is a more structured approach that puts the two sides on a more even keel.
This is especially important because both sides have unpalatable concessions to make and ugly truths to confront, necessitating a certain amount of arm-twisting if a peace agreement is ever to be reached.
The Israelis must face up the fact that their country was carved out of a land that has been inhabited by Arabs for many centuries, and that the continued presence of Muslims, both inside and outside Israel, is a reality.
Israeli Arabs cannot be second-class citizens, and their historical connection to the area cannot be denied. Neither can the Palestinians be asked to forego their security and right to self-determination so that the Israelis can enjoy theirs. As difficult as it is, Jerusalem must be a shared capital - it is not Israel's to take.
The Palestinians, in turn, must recognise that their country as they knew it is gone, and accept that it is no longer logistically possible for all the refugees created by the wars of the past few decades plus their descendants to return to what is known by many as "48 Palestine".
All parties must renounce violence and, of course, Hamas's controversial charter must be scrapped, or else totally redrawn to include an explicit recognition of Israel's right to exist.
There must also be an acceptance of the fact that, for a long time, the onus will be on the Palestinians to ensure that new-found freedom does not give way to radicalism, and that certain security measures are inevitable for years to come.
These are difficult issues, some of which go to the very heart of the collective consciousness of both peoples and touch on long-established narratives engrained in each nation's identity.
It is no surprise that no solution has yet been found to the conflict, but perhaps in 20 years’ time, we might look back at 2014 and say this was the year all that started to change. ·
Peace in our time? 2014 could prove a Middle East watershed by theweek.co.uk
Taliban are trying to justify Peshawar massacre from Hadith. Here are facts:
The Treachery of Jews of Medina and Justice by Jewish Law; Deut: 20:13-14
http://islamphobia.wordpress.com/rebuttal-anti-islam-faqs/conversion-by-sword/massacre-of-jews/
NEW DELHI -- On October 2, 2014, a powerful IED went off accidentally at a secret bomb-making factory of a group known as Al Jihad in rural West Bengal. Investigators identified the module as handiwork of Bengali, an Indian Mujahedeen -- Qaeda-Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh-affiliated terrorist leader.
Perennially at the forefront of homegrown and Pakistan-induced terrorism, India is suddenly surrounded by a spurt of terrorist threats from Al Qaeda; the Islamic State, also known as IS, ISIS or ISIL; and the Haqqani network, used interchangeably as Taliban -- all groups that had historically avoided the Indian theater.
Three specific but complex trends explain the abrupt rise in threats from terrorists.
Keep reading>>>>>>>
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6272780
WRITING in Vanity Fair magazine recently, Nobel Prize-winning economist and one of the world`s top intellectuals Joseph E. Stiglitz highlighted a fact that marks the end of an era in world history and holds immense promise and benefits for Pakistan and its citizens.
According to Stiglitz, at the turn of new year, China will become the world`s largest and most powerful economy overtaking the US and thus launching an era which he says `will last for a very long time, if not forever`.
How this has been established and why it has escaped the attention of the world`s news media is not the subject here and is best explained by the Nobel Prize-winning professor and the fourth most influential economist by academic citation himself.What is important for Pakistan is that this rise in its `greatest friend`s` stature could be the most fortunate event in what has so far been a rather forgettable new millennium for Islamabad. From the fallout of the 9/11 attacks to the growth of internal insurgencies and an increasingly beleaguered economy, the country has been dragging itself along with predictions of doom and disaster hanging over its head.
But China`s ascendancy coinciding with the end of the Afghan conflict means a new dawn could be approaching. It`s not all conjecture: between them, Pakistan`s past two governments have managed to inveigle a $43.5 billion investment deal from Beijing. What is needed now is the proper management and planning of the resulting schemes.
`Pakistan must be more transactional in its relationship with China,` said Dr Akbar Zaidi, a senior economist. `Over the years a lot of MoUs have been signed but rarely have these been translated into actual projects.
Dr Zaidi cited the example of the Thar Coal project, launched with much fanfare in 2011 but which has since run into financial trouble. While the government insists that it`s still on, he says that past history suggests that it is highly unlikely to be completed on time, and may never actually get operational.
`China has seen enough of Pakistan`s troubled governance to know that what is set in stone today may well all have melted away tomorrow,` he said.
`They may put in amounts as seed money which may seem enormous, but which is peanuts for them and then wait and see what sort of response comes from the national government in question. They have done this in Africa and Latin America, and have walked away when things got stuck in a rut.
Dr Zaidi`s hypothesis certainly remains true for most bilateral civilian projects. But it appears to lose weight when tested on defence cooperation between the two sides.
Technology transfer for initial weapons development from China for the M-11 / HATF 3, or the co-production of weapons systems such as the F-7P jet have resulted in a Pakistani weapons production industry that now looks set to prosper.
According to the ministry of defence production, military exports have doubled in the past year. This was clear at the recent IDEAS arms fair with greater interest shown in Pakistani defence goods than in those being displayed by renowned international firms.
One reason for the weapons industry`s success in comparison to the civilian sector is the predominance of the Pakistan military in relations with any foreign power.
However, if that was actually the case here, it would still not account for the number of MoUs signed or the fewer number of agreements reached in spheres that are purely civilian and where the grants given cannot be re-allocated to defence needs.
Debate on investment The biggest current example is of course the Pakistan-China trade corridor, seen as a game changer for the country. It also remains a top priority for the current government, something emphasised by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif himself. Yet the project, which envisages the construction of a vast transport and communications infrastructure to connect Chinese Kashgar to the Gwadar port, is already in dispute.
`Our problem is that our priorities remain narrowly confined to political and provincial domains,` said Daud Khan Achakzai, head of the Pakistan senate subcommittee on communications and transport. `This project will be developed over a period of at least 15 years and it needs long-term vision and planning, whereas each new government has been trying to amend it to best benefit its constituency.
In such a move recently, the PML-N led government has diverted the original route through Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan, to include Punjab and parts of Sindh.
This has resulted in an uproar from the benches, especially from KP and Balochistan MNAs.
Achakzai, who is from Zhob, says that while he agrees that Punjab and Sindh should also derive benefits from the project, this should not be at the cost of an already greatly discriminated Balochistan.
`Each province should get its just share; as should Pakistan,` he contends.
`We must have a greater debate over the investment from China, as they stand to gain over 10 days in transport time for goods and energy. Currently, it takes them 12 days to ship goods and fuel from the Middle East, whereas the corridor would cut this down to 24 to 36 hours.
This is particularly important, as Stiglitz points out. He says that while China may have moved into the number one economy slot, that does not mean its pace of growth is going to slow down anytime soon. In particular, experts agree, this means a growth in its demand for fuel and oil will increase, the largest proven deposits of which lie around the Persian Gulf.
As such, almost all indicators suggest that Beijing`s best years lie ahead. That`s something that its adversaries are well aware of and want to control as much as they can. None perhaps as much as the US, as is evident with current American President Barack Obama`s pivot to Asia policy which experts like Stiglitz maintain is nothing less than the encirclement and containment of the Chinese Dragon, preying on the fears of its smaller neighbours over territorial disputes.
The only exception to this appears to be Pakistan. In a recent conversation with this reporter at a defence seminar, Chinese officials described the relationship between the two countries by clasping their hands together and calling the two nations `brothers`. While some of this may be rhetoric, there is also a strong element of truth in it. As such it puts Pakistan in an enviable position to propel itself through the 21st century. The only obstacles in the way appear to be self constructed; their timely removal could help propel Pakistan into a new league of economic success.
PAKISTAN AND THE CHINESE CENTURY
By Syed Shoaib Hasan
Dawn.com
In these times of an ever-widening religious-secular divide in Pakistan a religious scholar could get so many tributes from the ‘secular’ segments of society, the one was shot dead by unknown assailant, believed in the establishment of a rational and objective religious discourse in the country.
kKilling is not only a setback for rational religious discourse in the country, it also indicates the expansion of extremist religious forces.
Faith-based violence, persecution and intolerance are becoming a regular feature of life with sporadic attacks on shrines and the worship places of non-Muslims, and incidents of enforced conversions being reported from different cities.
Rational voices in religious discourse are considered important to balance extremist views. But such voices have fallen victim to intolerance and militancy. Many depict it as an outcome of the overall intellectual crisis in the country, but when rational voices are silenced, the sectarian hate discourse gets louder.
The existing religious narrative provides a lot of space to extremists and militants.
Many rational voices have been silenced by extremist forces, including that of Dr Shakil Auj, the dean of the Islamic Studies Department of Karachi University. He is believed to have been killed on the basis of a fake fatwa. The seminary in Karachi, on whose letterhead the fatwa was issued declaring Dr Auj an apostate and a disbeliever, denied it. He was a thorough academician engaged in the discourse of religious moderation.
Maulana Masood Baig, a scholar from Jamia Binoria, Karachi, was a young scholar who was trying to engage madressah students in debates on critical issues. Maulana Baig was a friend of a young Shia scholar, Allama Ali Akbar Kumaili, the son of the renowned religious figure Allama Abbas Kumaili. Both were shot dead within a week of each other this year in Karachi.
There are several other religious scholars across the sectarian divide who have lost their lives in their quest to promote rationality. Most people do not know about their sacrifices and the loss their deaths have caused to religion and society. These were the voices of reason and represented the hope that an effective response against extremism could be produced from within the larger religious discourse. Obviously, such incidents of targeted killing discourage other scholars from challenging extremist and irrational voices in society.
It is also true that such voices of reason are not in abundance in Pakistan, voices that can develop ideological responses to counter extremist ideologies. Public opinion in Pakistan is also largely influenced by the dominant radical religious discourse and such voices of reason often appear alien to the people.
Consequently, a common man finds no attraction in moderate voices in other spheres of life as well, including politics and social life. Extremists are still targeting leaders and workers who represent moderate political views. A moderate and secular atmosphere provides a sense of protection to religious minorities. When minorities frequently fall victim to violence and persecution, it suggests irrationality and extremism have penetrated deep in the minds of the majority.
A rational religious discourse always contributes to shaping rational behaviour among individuals in a society. In contrast, the existing religious discourse in Pakistan provides a lot of space to extremists and militants either by outright support for them or by refusing to condemn them.
People who mostly follow the narratives offered to them by the state and the religious clergy also remain confused or silent about issues of religious extremism and militancy. The extremists indeed stand far ahead in propagating their ideologies through their publications and electronic media campaigns, which are together referred to as radical or militants’ media.
The extremists’ ideological campaigns notwithstanding, public opinion in Pakistan is greatly influenced by the prevalent larger hate discourse that is characterised by the existence of a large number of radical and sectarian organisations and madressahs.
Even though a number of Islamic scholars from all schools of thought in this larger religious discourse condemn terrorism and religious extremism, their view is not properly presented or publicised. At the same time, there is a glaring absence of a network of such religious scholars whose work focuses exclusively on countering the spread of religious radicalism and extremism in Pakistani society. As cited earlier, the increasing threats to such scholars are pushing the latter towards isolation or forcing them into silence, even exile.
Apart from enriching the intellectual discourse, inter-sectarian and inter-faith interactions help to develop the required rationality in religious discourse. Such interactions and dialogue are expected to promote a trend where efforts could be made to remove mutual misperceptions and settle controversies involving people of diverse opinion and bridge the gap between them.
Excerpts from 'No room for rational discourse' by Muhammad Amir Rana, dawn.com
The writer is a security analyst.