FROM CRICKET COMMUNALISM TO CRICKET NEUTRALITY - "A primer for Mohali - By Sandeep Dwivedi - Indian Express

FROM CRICKET COMMUNALISM TO CRICKET NEUTRALITY

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/a-primer-for-mohali/769053/0

A primer for Mohali

Sandeep Dwivedi

Tags : sandeep dwivedi, column, indian express, A primer for Mohali

Posted: Wed Mar 30 2011, 01:00 hrs

Such a long journey from being a partisan support to a cricket fan

It was a rare day for us kids, that sultry Saturday evening of April 1986. Forget dividing ourselves in two teams for our usual tennis-ball cricket game, we didn’t even feel like planting the stumps. About 24 hours back, Javed Miandad had a last ball six at Sharjah and the trauma had drained our energies.

Excuse or explanation failed us and the biggest heartbreak of our young lives was way too complex to deal with. That’s when one of us repeated what he had heard at home. “My father said, we can never beat them on a Friday,” said a subdued voice. The impasse was over. Finally, we had an excuse, and an explanation too, that helped us to come to terms with India’s loss. The “Bad Friday” logic suited us and there were slow, wise nods all around.


Suddenly, Chetan Sharma had sympathy as now it was fate that was burdened with the ignominy of bowling a full toss. “Poor Sharma, he was merely attempting to bowl a yorker,” we concluded.

In hindsight, that was our first encounter with cricket’s uncontrollables. Worse, that was also when cricketing communalism silently seeped into our immature minds for the first time. Unseen and unfelt by us, objectivity and cricketing commonsense exited with this new overbearing arrival.

Miandad’s quick reflexes and his unflappable temperament were now seen as incidental happenings in the pro-Pakistan designs that we believed the Maker had penned for all Fridays. Heavy emotional investment in India-Pakistan games and the juvenile interpretation of patriotism had taken a toll on us. The sports fan in us died. With time, he was to take a rebirth within us but not before we had missed several memorable sporting spectacles and failed to acknowledge or appreciate many great individual cricketing feats.

Getting up to switch off the television with Sachin Tendulkar’s dismissal and closing one’s eyes during a stunning spell by a hostile pacer from across the border were rituals strictly followed on big India-Pakistan match days.

Many fellow cricket crazies became mental wrecks. For them, the bat-and-ball skills became irrelevant as they started believing that match fortunes fluctuated by keeping one’s fingers crossed. Some even took great pains to convince others that it was the colour of their garments that had influenced India’s win.

Those were the Sharjah days during the illogical 1980s when absurdities were part of the whole cricketing experience. That was the time when most wanted criminals sat in VVIP boxes with their families, sub-standard commentators were seen to be entertaining and the word shady wasn’t just used to describe the comfortable stands under those desert canopies.

But something changed for us rabid and partisan Indian supporters during the 1992 World Cup. India was to exit early but the supreme Channel 9 coverage was way too entertaining for us Doordarshan addicts to turn our backs on the action from Australia and New Zealand. That’s when we actually saw Pakistan without bias. That’s when we actually made an attempt to know our neighbours. Not distracted by prayer or superstition, we sat wide-eyed to watch those amazing men in green.

They were a very skilful bunch led by a skipper whose walk on the field was similar to the gait that the Big Cats in African jungles flaunt when the National Geographic men pan their cameras on their pride.
There was a teenaged batting prodigy whose limited English vocabulary didn’t include the word pressure. A short and stodgy young leg-spinner with magical fingers who turned veteran batsmen into fumbling novices.

A couple of pacers with speed, guile and skills had a habit of shattering stumps with dream balls. Imran Khan led a team that had several show stoppers like Inzamam-ul Haq, Mushtaq Ahmed, Wasim Akram and Aaqib Javed.

It wasn’t a tough call when the super-entertaining Pakistan bunch played the bland English unit in the final. As Imran lifted the spherical crystal trophy we saw cricket in a new light.

The cobwebs had cleared, our neighbours were suddenly the cool guys. The transformation from a fanatical India fan to a more mature cricket follower took time, but it was a change for the better.

The mind is at peace, the brain works logically and even in these days of mad frenzy the sanity is intact. Having experienced the edgy life on the other side, I can vouch that the present state of semi-neutrality with a certain soft-corner for India is pleasant. I have availed the power to smirk and walk off with a smile when some Shahid Afridi vs Yuvraj Singh kind of debate ceases to be a cricket discussion and dissolves into ugly rhetoric. Since the game is always the winner, you can never be a sore loser.

After appreciating a classic Tendulkar cover drive, in case an Umar Gul in-cutter makes way between the Indian opener’s bat and pad, he too deserves at least a few claps. And if Zaheer Khan loses the race to be the leading wicket-taker to Afridi, it would not be the end of the world. Zaheer and Afridi have done enough to be judged by their showing in one tournament.

The idea here isn’t about being saintly, but it is the best way to deal with the war references and attempts to turn a cricket game into a gladiatorial duel. With the rulers of the two nations present in the stands, Mohali on Wednesday will have a perfect coliseum feel to it.

It is a challenge to cut out clichés and stereotypical sentiments from an Indo-Pak cricketing contest. But in case one achieves that blissful higher plane of cricketing neutrality, watching two sides with unique and outstanding skill sets would be a serene experience, and not necessarily a nerve-jangling ordeal.
sandeep.dwivedi@expressindia.com

------------------------------

http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=TOINEW&BaseHref=TOIM/2011/03/30&PageLabel=4&EntityId=Ar00403&ViewMode=HTML

Stars indicate a nail-biter

Chittaranjan Tembhekar | TNN

Mumbai: The situation appears to be fluid, even among the stars. Astrologers indicate that the stars do not favour any team outright in today’s World Cup semi-final at Mohali, which means that a nail-biting finish could be on the cards. Some numerologists, though, are veering towards an India win.

    Hundreds of people have begun consulting astrologers and numerologists to know in advance who will win the Indo-Pak clash. Some Mumbaikars are even deciding whether to watch the match or not after consulting the pundits.

    Astrologer Ajai Bhambi said the match is starting at 2.30 pm, while at 4.07 pm the moon will change position and move from Capricorn to Aquarius. “This may trigger sudden changes and offset equations in the early part of the match. However, there will be no major changes in the second half.” Bhambi said the team batting first will have to weather the early problems.

    “If you compare the players’ stars, both teams have equal chances. However, Dhoni’s stars are down, which is a cause for worry. I wish him the best,” said Bhambi.

    Pandit Suvashit Raj, an astrologer said the position of Saturn is not in India’s as well as Tendulkar’s favour. “It seems that Pakistan has better chances of winning. But the position of Shani, which remains uncertain, will decide the game’s fate,” he added.

    Numerologist Sanjay Jumaani, who has been getting calls from several people who want to know the possible result, said the numbers were in India’s favour.

    Normally, if India has to do well, the numbers 3, 6 and 9 matter the most as India’s number is 3 (Jupiter) and Bharat’s number is 6 (Venus). This is proven if you look at past victories and defeats, said Jumaani.

    “Since the match is being held on the 30th, that means the numbers are in India’s favour. The Australia match was on the 24th (adding up to 6). India had a target of 261 (9). Ahmedabad is 27 (9) and the Man of the Match was Yuvraj, whose jersey is 12 (3),” said Jumani. He added that Mohali is again 21 (3). Mumbai, where the final will be held, is 18 (9).

    On the other hand, Jumaani said that Pakistan’s number is 7, which does not favour the venue of Mohali. However, he added that 2011 is Pakistan’s lucky year. “Afridi’s number is 1 and he is the dark horse. Players like Kamran Akmal and Mohammed Hafeez need to be watched,” added Jumaani.

    Aniket Gupte, a Bandra resident, said his astrologer told him that India will have the edge in a nail-biting finish. “My astrologer has told me that the result will be decided in the last two hours, so I am going to watch it with total concentration,” he added. Meanwhile, Dilip Mehta, a Colaba resident, will skip the match as his astrologer friend predicted a defeat for India.

--------------

The Libya campaign - The coalition has begun its self-appointed task. But what is the aim, and what is the endgame? - THE ECONOMIST

http://www.economist.com/node/18442119?story_id=18442119

The Libya campaign

Into the unknown

The coalition has begun its self-appointed task. But what is the aim, and what is the endgame?

Mar 24th 2011 | from the print edition

EVEN as French warplanes set off on March 19th, under a United Nations mandate, to stop Muammar Qaddafi’s tanks and artillery reaching the Libyan rebel stronghold of Benghazi, it was clear that the hastily assembled “coalition of the willing” would have to make it up as it went along. The pace of events on the ground had left little time for reflection.


Security Council Resolution 1973, passed less than 48 hours earlier with Russia, China, Brazil, India and Germany abstaining, was a triumph for French and British diplomacy. France’s president, Nicolas Sarkozy, had worked energetically to persuade Arab countries to make an appeal through the usually fairly useless Arab League for the UN to come to the aid of Libyan civilians. David Cameron, Britain’s prime minister, had done his part by nudging the Americans to overcome their reservations about military intervention. Remarkably the resolution, which was co-sponsored by Lebanon, gave the allies an almost free hand, short of a full-scale invasion and occupation, to use “all necessary measures” to protect civilians from Colonel Qaddafi’s advancing forces.

Yet those words have led to some confusion, among both allies and rebels, about what could or should be done. There has been wrangling, too, over who should lead the operation when the Americans carry out their pledge, supposedly within the next few days, to withdraw to a merely supportive role.

It already looks as if establishing the no-fly zone was the easy part. The first barrage of nearly 120 Tomahawk cruise missiles from American warships and a British submarine, which struck 20 command-and-control sites, severely damaged the regime’s ability to operate its air-defence system. Further salvoes of cruise missiles and attacks by British, American and French aircraft over the next few nights appear to have finished the job, although Colonel Qaddafi may have saved some of his radar simply by turning it off.

By March 22nd a no-fly zone covered most of the rebel-held eastern coastal region. Combat patrols were being flown by aircraft from countries including Canada, Spain, Denmark, Italy and Belgium. Planes from Qatar were expected by March 27th. Over the next few days the aim is to extend the zone eastwards until it covers the whole of the coast to the capital, Tripoli. A de facto maritime exclusion zone has also been imposed, preventing Colonel Qaddafi from either re-supplying his forces or shelling rebel-held cities from the sea.

How useful the no-fly zone will be in halting the regime’s counter-offensive is debatable. Colonel Qaddafi may have had fewer than 40 operational combat aircraft at most, and has many fewer now; but his fleet of attack helicopters (also vulnerable to “all necessary measures”) has provided close support for ground troops, which at times has given him a critical advantage.

In some ways, the no-fly zone is as much a diplomatic as a military tool—a way of binding together a visibly fragile 14-nation alliance. But as the drafters of the resolution realised, it was never going to be enough on its own to prevent Colonel Qaddafi from killing his people.

Even without their combat aircraft and helicopter gunships, Colonel Qaddafi’s paramilitaries are proving too well-trained and well-equipped for the motley rebel forces to withstand on their own. The spectacularly destructive results of the first French attack on the loyalist forces descending on Benghazi may have led the rebels to think that their fighting would be done for them, and that their enemies would quickly crumble. But it had its effect because Colonel Qaddafi’s men, in their desperate attempt to reach Benghazi before the allies could get their act together, had allowed their supply lines to become dangerously overstretched, leaving tanks, transporters and rocket launchers strung out as sitting ducks along the desert road. 

Benghazi and other rebel towns in the far east of the country, such as Tobruk, are now relatively secure from any attempt by the regime to recapture them—a huge change from only a few days ago. But the picture in towns already controlled by Colonel Qaddafi’s forces is less clear-cut. The rebels’ attempt on March 21st to relieve the strategic crossroads town of Ajdabiya, 145km (90 miles) south-west of Benghazi, showed what they are up against and the limits of their military capability.

Emboldened by the coalition’s demand that the regime should pull back from Ajdabiya, which was retaken by government forces last week, the rebels hoped that air attacks would do the same job for them as they had outside Benghazi. When jets were heard overhead, followed by big explosions, a few hundred rebels, toting a variety of light weapons from pick-up trucks, charged forward. But as shells and rockets began raining down on them they fled as quickly as they had come. Without discipline or training, adequate communications or a unified command structure, they are no match for Colonel Qaddafi’s men.

Repulsing government forces from Ajdabiya, which controls the water supply to Benghazi, is a key objective for the coalition and the rebels. Coalition aircraft began launching strikes on the loyalist forces on March 22nd, but they have so far proved hard to dislodge.

The situation in Libya’s third-largest city, Misrata, only 130 miles east of Tripoli and with a population of more than half a million, appeared even more desperate. After more than a week of heavy fighting in which well over 100 people are said to have died, the government announced on March 21st that it was in full control of the town. That now looks premature. Loyalist tanks and artillery that had been sporadically bombarding the city for several weeks were silenced (at least temporarily) after pinpoint air strikes on the 23rd. According to reports from within Misrata, many of the tanks were destroyed and many of Colonel Qaddafi’s men were seen fleeing. Snipers, however, continued their deadly work in the centre and around the main hospital.

In Tripoli, despite the nightly attacks on the regime’s command-and-control centres, there is not much sign of the government losing its grip. The regular pro-Qaddafi demonstrations do not accurately reflect feeling within the capital, but there is no way of knowing how strong opposition to the colonel may be.

A further complication for the coalition is the predictable exploitation of “human shields” (apparently, mostly volunteers) to protect high-value government targets. On March 21st an RAF Tornado aborted its mission close to Tripoli after it was warned that civilians, including some foreign journalists, were close to its target.

The strikes on Tripoli also raised the question of whether trying to kill Colonel Qaddafi himself was consistent with the terms of the Security Council resolution. The legal advice appears ambiguous. “Regime change” is not an allied goal, even though nobody believes that a peaceful, democratic Libya is possible while the colonel is around. On the other hand, if it is clear (as it surely is) that Colonel Qaddafi has given orders that have resulted in the butchering of Libyan civilians, he is indeed a legitimate target. This seems to be the position of the British government, which on March 21st was quick to slap down the chief of the defence staff, Sir David Richards, who had grumpily told a BBC journalist that going after Colonel Qaddafi was “absolutely…not allowed”.

Who leads?

All this means that the coalition urgently needs to work out what its strategic objectives are and what it is prepared to do to achieve them. But before that, it must sort out who is going to lead it.
The Americans were willing to accept that role in the first phase of the campaign because of the range of assets (from the opening cruise-missile barrage, to electronic jamming, intelligence-gathering, mission co-ordination and fuel supply) that only they could bring to the speedy establishment of the no-fly zone. But in line with the new humility and commitment to multilateralism that Barack Obama preaches, they were adamant that they would then hand over to somebody else.

That did not, however, mean falling in with Mr Sarkozy’s preference for a Franco-British command. Mr Sarkozy argued from the start that he did not want the operation led by NATO, because NATO is seen in the Arab world as a tool of American power, and Arab support for the coalition is already weak. The Americans and the British, however, were reluctant to sideline NATO. The result was a fudge agreed late on March 22nd. Mr Sarkozy and Mr Obama agreed that NATO would assume day-to-day military command of the no-fly zone under Admiral James Stavrides, the American supreme allied commander in Europe; but that, reflecting some of NATO’s own divisions, particularly the ambivalence of Turkey and Germany, political control would lie with the members of the coalition rather than with the North Atlantic Council, the main decision-making body of the alliance. However, late on March 23rd Turkey’s opposition to coalition ground attacks stalled the signing of the compromise.

Obstructions of this sort make it all the harder to settle other essential matters swiftly. The first is to devise a realistic set of strategic goals. One may already have been achieved. With no more than about 10,000 troops available and with any advance across the desert acutely exposed to coalition air strikes, Colonel Qaddafi has almost certainly lost his chance to reimpose his authority in the east.

However, there have been doubts about how far attacks from the air could help the civilians who are within Colonel Qaddafi’s reach. The position of the government forces besieging Ajdabiya looked precarious after air attacks on March 22nd, and they were said to be running out of ammunition. But the big test is bringing help to Misrata. Admiral Samuel Locklear, a coalition commander, said that all options were being considered.

Misrata is important not just for humanitarian reasons. If it cannot be saved, or the cost of doing so is deemed too high, the coalition would be sending a signal that for now there is not much it can do to prevent Colonel Qaddafi consolidating his position in the western half of the country. But if coalition air strikes are able to take out government heavy weaponry in urban areas without significant risk to civilians, as appears to be happening in Misrata, the pessimists may be confounded.

What happens to Misrata, in other words, could define the extent of the coalition’s objectives, at least in the short term. It must decide whether there is any realistic prospect of the rebels taking on Colonel Qaddafi’s forces and power structure in the west. The rebels themselves are reported to be divided between those who believe that the regime can be toppled with one more push, as long as they are supported by coalition air power, and those who believe that a temporary stalemate makes more sense. During such a stalemate, the rebels’ national council in Benghazi could turn itself into a government-in-waiting capable of speaking with one voice, and much-needed military capabilities could be developed.

There may also be some tension within the coalition between those keen to attempt a speedy resolution and those who are resigned to a lengthier engagement. Patience is still likely to be the better bet, unless the regime collapses from within.

Misrata makes that outcome just a bit more likely. Colonel Qaddafi’s troops and supporters are rapidly learning just how devastatingly effective western air power can be. But without substantial defections from the loyalist army, the rebels cannot hope to become a cohesive military force unless they receive weapons and training from outside, which would seem to be in breach of the UN arms embargo.

A short-term partition of Libya might be bearable, but a long-term one raises the prospect of an arms race, rapid economic decline and Colonel Qaddafi resuming his sponsorship of international terrorism. Algeria, which disavows the Arab League declaration, might start rearming the colonel across his western border.

Two further pressing issues for the coalition will be the enforcement of sanctions against the regime and the question of whether the rebels can gain access to Libya’s (diminished) oil revenues. The biggest refinery, at Ras Lanuf, lies in what is likely to be the rebels’ area of control; so too do many of the oilfields. On the other hand, if reports that the colonel has $6.4 billion-worth of gold stashed away in the country’s central bank in Tripoli are true, he has a potential advantage in any war of attrition. If he can liquidate this hoard into cash, arms and food, his chances of clinging on indefinitely will be boosted.

Given the range of uncertainties, the question of targeting Colonel Qaddafi himself becomes more relevant. Without him, it is hard to see the regime surviving for more than a few weeks. The coalition will not change its declared position that killing the Libyan war leader is not on its list of objectives. But were it somehow to happen, few would complain.

I have never seen the Sabarmati Express, says Godhra 'mastermind' - By Abu Zafar -IANS - Ummid.com

http://www.ummid.com/news/2011/March/26.03.2011/godhra_mastermind_interview.htm

I have never seen the Sabarmati Express, says Godhra 'mastermind' Saturday March 26, 2011 02:25:33 PM, Abu Zafar , IANS

Related Articles 'How will they get back their 9 years' Asks mother of 3 acquitted in Godhra case Bibi Khatoon from Godhara district, Gujarat, is the mother of the three, who have been acquitted by the court February 21.   » Acquitted in Godhra case, he dies before meeting his family Forensic report on Godhra train burning dents Govt./VHP claims Godhra train carnage: 31 convicted, 63 acquitted Godhra verdict travesty of justice, says lawyer Prashant Bhushan Godhra (Gujarat): The man who spent eight years in jail on charges of burning the Sabarmati Express in Godhra and killing 59 people has now been declared innocent and walks free. But Saeed Umarji is a bitter man and says he is a social worker who had never even seen the train. Maulana Hussain Ibrahim Umarji, popularly known as Saeed Umarji, said that the only reason authorities had punished him was because he spoke on behalf of innocent fellow Muslims. "I have never seen the Sabarmati Express because it passes from Godhra only at night," the 65-year-old Umarji told IANS in an exclusive interview. Umarji said he was a social worker who was at the forefront of relief efforts when a devastating earthquake ravaged Latur in Maharashtra in 1993 and Kutch in Gujarat in 2001. "I also ran several relief camps after the Gujarat riots of 2002. A total of 3,500 people took shelter. We also took care of people who got arrested in the Godhra case," said Umarji, who runs educational institutions in the town of Godhra, about 115 km from Gujarat's main city Ahmedabad. A mob targeted the Sabarmati Express's Coach S6 Feb 27, 2002, near the Godhra station burning to death 59 people, mostly Hindu activists who were returning home from Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh. The incident, later dubbed a conspiracy, triggered one of the worst communal riots in Gujarat leaving over 1,000 people, mostly Muslims, dead. Thousands were injured, and thousands of others uprooted from homes. Umarji was one of the many arrested for the train burning. After eight years in jail, a judge last month acquitted Umarji and many others of the charges. A graduate from Darul Uloom, Deoband, Umarji is a bitter man today. "Jail is a graveyard of living people," Umarji said. "I lost eight years of my precious life. No one can return it now. I and my family were mentally tortured. "Our ladies normally never stepped out of home. But after my arrest, for several days my wife couldn't stay at home. My sons lived in fear," Umarji told IANS, referring to fears of reprisals from Hindu radicals. While he was in prison, and with no sign when -- if at all -- he would be released, four of his sons and two daughters got married. But there was an unusual spin-off because of his stay in the Sabarmati Central Jail at Ahmadabad. "Before my arrest, I could walk only to the nearby mosque. But I exercised in jail. Now I walk around 10 km daily." The social worker says he was implicated in a false case because he tried to blame the state government of Narendra Modi for the 2002 violence. "My biggest sin was that that I gave a memorandum to Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayeei and explained in detail the role of the state machinery during the riots. That was when he visited Godhra. "I mentioned the problems we (Muslims) faced after the Godhra incident, but they (authorities) wanted us to keep quiet and not to complain." Later, he was asked to meet Vajpayee at Gandhinagar. "I refused. I didn't want to meet him because it was of no use." Umarji recalled how police treated him in captivity. One question he was repeatedly asked was why he gave a statement against the Gujarat Police on the human rights situation. Even as he laments over his fate, Umarji is sympathetic to those who died in the Sabarmati Express. "I condemn that incident and I express my sympathy to them and their families." (Abu Zafar can be contacted at abuzafar@journalist.com)

Keeping the inclusive faith By Sadia Dehlvi - The Times of India | Comments by Ghulam Muhammed

Friday, March 25, 2011

Comments posted on Times of India website over Sadia Dehlvi’s article: Keeping The Inclusive Faith:

Since when majority becomes the basis for any change in Islamic fundamentals? The idea of democratic majority to subvert the basic monotheism of Islamic percepts can not be the criteria to judge or justify 'Indian Islam'. Any deviation have to addressed in its entirety and reforms instituted. Those who are set in some deviant ritualistic practices borrowed from outside influences, have to be examined and discarded. In our secular polity, state has no role to play in individual religions. It remains the duty of the people themselves to examine how far we have strayed from the right path and do everything to restore the letter and spirit of Islam as presented to the World by our Prophet (PBUH). 'Indian Islam' is viewed with big apprehension by the rest of the Muslim world. Sadia Dehlvi has articulated that deviations in a manner, as if that are the virtues that should be adopted by rest of the Islamic World. That is an erroneous exercise. In its long history, Islam has witnessed many an upheavals in the name of reforms and modernity. However, basics of faith have always survived and will survive in the future, inshallah. That is a divine commitment.

Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai

ghulammuhammed3@gmail.com

http://ghulammuhammed.blogspot.com  

 --------------------

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/opinion/edit-page/Keeping-the-inclusive-faith/articleshow/7781965.cms

TOP ARTICLE

Keeping the inclusive faith

Sadia Dehlvi | Mar 24, 2011, 07.44pm IST


Imam Al Sudais's India visit to lecture at the Deoband seminary is sending some sections of the Muslim community into overdrive. I received a card from the India Islamic Cultural Centre (IICC) in Delhi to attend an address by 'His Holiness', Imam-e-Haram, Dr Sheikh Abdul Rahman Al Sudais, presently imam of the mosque in Mecca. The accompanying letter details the imam's achievements including his educational degrees in sharia law. In 2005, he received 'The Islamic Personality of the Year' award and stood nominated for the Dubai International Quran Award, which he accepted.

The 'His Holiness' came as a jolt, for no such prefixes have ever been added to Prophet Muhammad's name or that of his companions, who rank the highest in Muslim piety. As one devoted to Islam, i believe using the Quran to name an award belittles the sanctity of God's word and borders on blasphemy. Legitimising such an award by its acceptance seems a worse action. The early history of Islam contains no examples of spiritual or religious leaders accepting state or private awards. On the contrary, sharia and prophetic traditions frown upon those who seek or allow public adulation, for all righteous deeds are for God alone.

The Deoband leadership has requested that Al Sudais not be frisked during his visit to Parliament. Due respect must be accorded to the visiting imam, because he leads the prayers at the Kaabah. This reverence flows from 'where' the prayers are led and not because of 'who' the imam is. To quote Arshad Madani of the Jamiat-e-Ulama-e-Hind, "Sheikh Al Sudais is the highest religious leader of the Muslims". This is misleading because Al Sudais merely represents the highest-ranking sacred space. The worldwide Muslim majority does not subscribe to the radical Wahhabi ideology propagated by Saudi clerics.

This political, narrow, legalistic and literalist interpretation of Islam emerged from the desert wastelands of Najd in Saudi Arabia from among the followers of the Bedouin Abdul Wahhab, an 18th century self-claimed reformist. The trajectory of the Wahhabi movement is rooted in violence, legitimising jihad as an armed conflict to kill fellow Muslims in disagreement with their vision of Islam by declaring them kafirs, infidels. Related to the ruling family through matrimonial alliances, Abdul Wahhab's family continues to control the ministry of religion, quashing many reforms desired by the political leadership, particularly by the present moderate King Abdullah.

The Wahhabis, who call themselves 'Salafis', have a limited following in the subcontinent. It includes the Deoband seminary, Tablighi Jamaat, Ahle Hadith and the Jamaat-e-Islami in Pakistan. Together, they constitute not more than 15 to 20% of the total population. Unfortunately, the government and the public fall prey to media-driven stereotypes. The perceptions of these factions representing majority Muslim opinion are baseless. Muslims are not monolithic communities but adhere to varied interpretations of Islam. In India and Pakistan, the Ahle Sunnat wal Jamaat represented by the Barelvi creed has the largest following.

Saudi clerics, including Al Sudais, face international criticism for inciting passions against the Barelvis, Shias, other Muslim minorities and non-Muslims. The Saudi state outsources its Wahhabi ideology by spending billions of dollars in patronising the building and running of mosques, madrassas, journals and cleric training programmes. It remains the fountainhead of the extremism infiltrating Muslim communities, tearing their local cultures apart. The bombing of dargahs and Shia mosques in Pakistan is one such manifestation.

The Saudi state has robbed all Muslims in the world of their legitimate cultural, historical and spiritual legacy, both in the physical and spiritual realm. In 1925, despite global outrage, all mausoleums including those of the Prophet's family at Jannat-ul Maali and Jannat-ul Baqi, the sacred graveyards of Mecca and Medina, were demolished. Once reflecting Islamic glory and heritage, the bulldozed compounds are now typical Wahhabi burial grounds with rows of featureless unmarked graves. Several other historical sites continue to be obliterated.

Throughout history, Sufis and their disciples from different parts of the globe inhabited Mecca and Medina, the first centres of spiritual Islam. Now, the constant patrolling by the mutawwah, the religious police, ensures that pilgrims do not participate in collective spiritual gatherings. Forced to follow Wahhabi practices, devotees in Medina are not allowed to face the Prophet's chamber in supplication. Women face severe restrictions of time and space at the sacred mosques. It is decreed sinful and therefore criminal to write, read, sing or listen to 'naat', poetic praise, of the Prophet. Enforcements have washed away these traditions commonplace during Prophet Muhammad's life. Thirty-five among the Prophet's poet companions composed 'naat', Hassan ibn Thabit being his favourite.

The aims and objective of the IICC is to preserve and promote the composite and inclusive cultural traditions of Indian Muslims. Since its inception, the Centre has been trying to decode which cultural activities are sharia compliant and those that are not. Therefore, it is ironic and worrying that the IICC is one of the venues for the imam's address. I hope Al Sudais's discourse triggers a genuine and long overdue intra-faith dialogue amongst Indian Muslims as to what the rightful traditions of Islam are.

( The writer is a commentator and an author.)

'I anticipate more conflict in the Mid-East’: Niall Ferguson - Report By Aarefa Johari - Hindustan Times, Mumbai

http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/mumbai/I-anticipate-more-conflict-in-the-Mid-East/Article1-676533.aspx

Thu,24 Mar 2011

'I anticipate more conflict in the Mid-East’: Niall Ferguson

Aarefa Johari, Hindustan Times
Mumbai, March 23, 2011

In his new book, British historian Niall Ferguson believes he has come up with the most interesting question anyone in his profession could ask today: how did the Western nations come to dominate all the world? The book, Civilization: The West and the Rest, also provides an answer to the question, and will be out on Indian bookshelves by Thursday. Ferguson, who specialises in economic and business history, is in the city to promote the book.

“The gaps between the West and the rest of the world are rapidly closing, and to understand the present, it is important to ask ourselves, how did the gaps get so big in the first place?” said Ferguson, 47, author of more than 12 history books, including the controversial Ascent of Money (2008) and The Pity of War (1998).


In Civilization, he explores the factors that determined how the Western world, visibly subordinate to the flourishing Oriental empires before the 1500s, managed to become the most powerful civilisation in the world in a few centuries. Using modern computer jargon, Ferguson claims the West outdid the East because they created six “killer applications” for themselves – competition (both economic and political), science, rule of law (democracy), medicine, consumerism and the work ethic.


“I wanted to create an integrated theory that brought various institutional explanations of Western dominance together in an analytical framework,” said Ferguson, who believes these six “applications” are interconnected and the West could not have had one without the other. “You have to download them all.” 

Once set on a path of innovation, Ferguson claims European creativity was superior to others, and the West retained monopoly over these six institutions and ideas.


“They were not secretive about it, but somehow it was only in the late 19th century that Japan became the first eastern nation to copy the West systematically,” said Ferguson.


While he recognises the dangers that Westernisation has posed to the environment, Ferguson critiques Gandhi’s anti-West stance in his book. “Gandhi rejected everything Western, including modern medicine, which has been an enormous source of improvement in human health in India,” said Ferguson, who constructs a hopeful scenario for the future given the West’s “superior” problem-solving skills.


“It is possible that westernisation includes solving the problem of climate change and increasing the efficiency with which resources are consumed.” 

For the immediate future, however, Ferguson’s predictions remain grim. “The dominance of Western civilisations is declining, and in the next two decades, I anticipate increased conflict, particularly in the Middle-East.

---------------

http://india.foreignpolicyblogs.com/tag/india/

Has India Downloaded the ‘Killer Apps’?

By madhavibhasin

Monday, March 21st 2011

Harvard historian Niall Ferguson’s ‘six killer applications’ theory is the latest attempt to unravel the mystery of the decline of Western civilization. Ferguson in his recent work Civilization: The West and the Rest, chronicles the rise of the Western Civilization during the past 500 years and explains how China and the east may soon overtake the Western countries. According to Ferguson, “what distinguished the West from the Rest – the mainsprings of global power – were six identifiably novel complexes of institutions and associated ideas and behaviours…” The distinguishing features of the Western Civilization, which Ferguson refers to as ‘killer apps’ include competition, science, property rights, medicine, consumer society and work ethic. In Ferguson’s analysis “we are already living through the twilight of Western predominance. But that is not just because most of the Rest have now downloaded all or nearly all of our killer apps. It is also because we ourselves have lost faith in our own civilisation.”

As many would expect, India falls in Freguson’s category of the Rest. This article explores the extent to which India has downloaded and is actively using the ‘killer apps’. The discussion leads to another vital question: are these ‘killer apps’ critical for India’s rise to global prominence?
Decentralization of political and economic life fostered competitive conditions in the West facilitating the emergence of nation states and capitalism. This killer app of competition was lacking during the early decades of independent India. Economic power was concentrated in the hands of the state and the state was dominated by an elitist leadership of one political party. Despite growing decentralization since the 1990s the idea of nation-state and capitalism as understood in the West has not evolved in India. Economic competition has flourished but the Indian state (which is constitutionally declared as ‘socialist’) struggles to usher in social democracy. Increasing political competition feeds into rival notions of ‘nation’ and regional identities struggle for recognition. Decentralization of political and economic life in India has encouraged multiple conceptions of political authority and economic models.

Scientific innovations and its use in enhancing military technologies allowed the West to ensure its supremacy over the Rest. In India the moral impediment to dedicating scientific innovation for enhancing military prowess continues. Prime Minister Nehru ensured that India’s talent in science was directed at solving the country’s social and economic challenges rather than buttressing its military capabilities. India’s indigenous research and development in military technologies continues to remain weak; 65-70 per cent of the defense equipment is imported.  According to strategic analyst, Subhahs Kapila, the Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) has not contributed to enhancing India’s indigenous defense production capabilities.

Innovation in the non-military sector is only modest. Three of the top five patent filing nations in Asia for 2010 were Japan, China and Korea; India even did not make it to the top-15 global list. According to the Worldwide Intellectual Property Rights Organization India filed 1,109 patents applications in 2010. Compare this to figures for China – 12,337 and the United States – 44,855. It seems unlikely that India is using the tool of scientific innovation to chart a global leadership role.

To the dismay of many Indians, democracy does not qualify as a ‘killer app’ in Ferguson’s theory. 

Universal franchise was not, according to Ferguson, a feature of the Western Civilization during its ascendancy phase between 1500 and 1913. For Ferguson rule of law and property rights are the apps that make democracy effective by taking it beyond the narrow confines of periodic elections.

India introduced universal adult franchise for an illiterate and poverty stricken population in 1951. Unlike the West, democracy in India was not the culmination but a preparation for the political education of the citizens. India is unique case where all citizens share equal democratic rights without a uniform civil code. Sociologist Andre Beteille, among others, has observed that Indians have difficulty in subjecting themselves to a rule of law and individual rights lack the depth and firmness evident in the United States. India’s functional democracy has bolstered the country international standing without a priori dependence on the apps of rule of law and property rights.

Innovations in medicine science allowed the Western Civilization to ensure better health and longer life expectancy for its population. Thus medicine finds a place of honor on Ferguson’s ‘killer app’ list. The socio-cultural characteristics of the Indian population limit the impact of medical innovation on public good. Sendhil Mullainthan, Professor of Economics at Harvard, explains how children in rural India die due to diarrhoea even though cheap antidotes to the ailment are widely available. According to Mullainthan, in India innovations simply can’t address the complex challenges. Innovation requires social engineering to convince the target segment of its benefits. Despite innovations in medical science, India continues to face huge health related challenges due to lack of social engineering.

Demands of the consumer society propelled the economies of the Western countries and served as an impetus for the Industrial Revolution. Indians have not only downloaded but are actively using the consumer society app. India’s growing middle class with a huge appetite for consumer goods ranging from textiles and high-end electronics to aspirational items like health, wellness and lifestyle products augurs well for the country’s economic growth. McKinsey Global Institute in a report titled, “The Bird of Gold” highlights that “if India continues on its current high-growth path, over the next two decades the Indian market will undergo a major transformation. Income levels will almost triple, and India will climb from its position as the twelfth-largest consumer market today to become the world’s fifth-largest consumer market by 2025.”  Demands of the consumer society remain a potent force for accelerating India’s economic growth in the coming decades.

Ferguson’s work ethic app implies a moral framework and mode of activity derivable from (among other sources) Protestant Christianity, which binds the society created by the other apps. Ferguson observes that the Asian population tends to work for longer hours and the Westerns have become generally lazy. People in India, undoubtedly spend longer hours at work but it would be erroneous to equate duration with quality. Absence of well-defined procedures and complex hierarchies usually contribute to longer working hours for professionals in India. Moreover, nurturing a common work ethic for a culturally diverse country like India is unlikely. For instance, while the Punjabi salesmen in the Greater Kailash shopping area of South Delhi dole out incentives to attract customers throughout the day, the Bengali locality of Chitranjan Park, just a few miles away, shuts down business for afternoon siesta.

According to Ferguson though there is a single past there are many probable futures. Likewise there are many paths to the future; India has opted for a path which may be comparable in some measure but is not identical to the growth trajectory of the Western Civilization. Apart form the trend of consumer society, India appears to have followed a distinct pathway to claim global prominence. This raises doubts about Ferguson’s approach of treating the ‘killer apps’ as a simple download-and-use manual for aspiring countries. The Indian example demonstrates that customized alternatives, inspired by local realities and international experience, are more viable routes for national success.

Bengal worse than Gujarat for Muslims? By Abantika Ghosh, TNN | Mar 23, 2011, 03.39am IST

Caveat: As Times of India is not known to Indian Muslims for any soft spot for Muslims and Indian Muslims, the following article MAY be considered by some as a paid advertorial on behalf of one or other political parties. However, that does not take out the veracity of the facts on merit. The article is circulated in public interest here. :

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Bengal-worse-than-Gujarat-for-Muslims/articleshow/7767763.cms

Bengal worse than Gujarat for Muslims?

Abantika Ghosh, TNN | Mar 23, 2011, 03.39am IST

NEW DELHI: These are figures the Left Front should be wary of as it prepares to defend its citadel of 34 years in West Bengal.

An analysis of data on the Muslim community released by the chief economist of the National Council of Applied Economic Research, Abu Saleh Sheriff, reveals that the state's minority has benefited little from development measures. In terms of human development indices, the Muslims have fared very poorly.

Of the 25.2% Muslim population, only 2.1% have government jobs and 50% children are out of school at the primary level. Only 12% go on to complete matriculation. These numbers are all the more astonishing given the fact that Left swears by its secular credentials and positions itself as a protector of minority rights.

Alarm bells have already started ringing, especially after a postmortem of the Left's poor showing in the civic elections last year. An important factor which could have resulted in the dismal performance was Muslim disenchantment. In what may be viewed as the party's efforts to make amends, there is a steep 33% hike in the number of Muslim candidates fielded by Left Front. It has gone up from 42 in 2006 to 56 this time in the 292-member Assembly.

Throughout his lecture, Sheriff — who has also been the member secretary of the Sachar panel — spoke of Gujarat and West Bengal in the same breath. In fact, he used the data to project the Left-ruled state in a far worse light than the state ruled by Narendra Modi, not regarded by many as a benefactor of the minorities. And this comparison appeared all the more relevant because the West Bengal government had gone out of its way to provide shelter to Qutubuddin Ansari, the man who became the face of the post-Godhra riots with his folded hands and tearful eyes.

"If a substantial fraction of the state's 25% Muslim population have traditionally voted for the alliance it could be because of the projected gains of the land reforms even though if you look at the figures, it shows that these reforms do not seem to have made any significant difference to the living standards of the community. With the elections coming, it is time this reality is brought to the knowledge of the public," Sheriff said. He was addressing a seminar on "Relative development of West Bengal and Socio-Religious Differentials" organized by the Institute of Objective Studies at the India Islamic Cultural Cultural Centre.

Shariff's figures on education, sourced, according to him from the census database and the Planning Commission, show 50% Muslim children attend school at the primary level, 26% remain in middle school and only 12% complete matriculation against 54%, 30% and 13% respectively for SC/STs and 80%, 58% and 38% for others.

Of the 90 minority-concentrated districts in the country, West Bengal has 12. "The worst are the state government employment figures where even Gujarat with its 9.1% Muslim population and with a 5.4% share in jobs is way ahead of West Bengal which is by far the worst in the country. We had to try very hard to get these figures out from the state government because, for obvious reasons, they are very secretive about this," Shariff said.

A look at OBC statistics in Bengal shows only 2.4% of its Muslims belong to that category. This, Sheriff says, is not the real picture and simply exposes the state government's reluctance to undertake the enumeration exercise.

 -----------

Repl

Do Qaddafi tanks fly?

@GhulamMuhammed Ghulam Muhammed

UN allowed for a no-fly zone over Libya.

Now CNN/BCC/Aljazeera show tanks bombed in airstrikes by Britain, France, US.

Do Qaddafi tanks fly?