by Raymond Ibrahim*
After mentioning the sort of atrocities Christians in Pakistan suffer — including being killed by “blasphemy” laws, constantly “abused in public and harassed in the street by groups of Muslim youths,” ostracized and impoverished by the government — a recent Fox News report reminds us that Christian persecution is further exacerbated by anti-Americanism:
Hina Jilani is a Pakistani women’s rights activist, an advocate of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, a former U.N. Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Human Rights Defenders, and a co-author of the Goldstone Report.
Dear Hina Jilani:
Greetings! I am familiar with and an admirer of your work as a Pakistani feminist and human rights lawyer, one who has gone on record opposing both honor killing and rape and the inadequate legislation against such crimes in Pakistan.
In 1999, you handled one very high profile honor killing case, that of a Pakistani woman, Samia Imran (aka Samia Sarwar), whose physician mother and politically powerful father arranged that she be shot to death in your office because she dared to seek a divorce from a dangerously violent Pakistani husband. I wrote about this case in 2004-2005 and have written about it again any number of times since then.
Pakistan’s, “blasphemy law holds a death sentence for anyone who insults Islam. … Although no-one convicted under the blasphemy law has ever been executed, more than 30 accused have been killed by lynch mobs.” Today, Shahbaz Bhatti, the Pakistani government’s only Christian cabinet minister was, “shot dead by gunmen who ambushed his car in broad daylight in the capital, Islamabad. … In January, Punjab Governor Salman Taseer, who had also opposed the law, was shot dead by one of his bodyguards.”
Such savagery; such ignorance. The word “blasphemy” reeks of societal backwardness and smells of a total misunderstanding of free speech. Murder to silence free expression is anathema to everything the Western World has been built upon. Pakistani Minister Bhatti was not only savagely slaughtered, but he was set up by an increasingly bold Islamist movement in his home country:
by Andrew M. Roe*
The Afghan conflict has refocused world attention on Waziristan. Once one of the British Empire’s most volatile territories, the remote small province in northwestern Pakistan is now home to Taliban insurgents, al-Qaeda fighters, rogue elements within the Pakistani military, and Western jihadists, who use it as a base to rest, heal, rearm, train, and plan before they launch again across the porous border into Afghanistan. It is also the area where Osama bin Laden and many of his top lieutenants are probably hiding and a regular target for U.S. air strikes against key Taliban personnel. Pakistani military operations destroyed insurgent forces and caused mass civilian dislocation, yet efforts to produce a lasting peace deal with the local tribesmen and the Taliban have proved futile. Waziristan remains a dangerous and unpredictable region with the potential to unhinge President Hamid Karzai’s fragile regime in Afghanistan, threaten the Pakistani government, and pose a major challenge to regional stability.
From LiveLeak and ABC via Jihad Watch, the Islamist Taliban stone a woman to death “because she was seen out with a man:”
Jihad Watch adds:
By Barry Rubin
Two readers asked me questions well worth answering. The first asked whether Islam itself isn’t the enemy; the second, how these distinctions appear from an Israeli standpoint.
Regarding the first question, I would stress that “Islam” as a religion functioning in the world is not at war with anyone as such. There are those who want to steer Islam toward an active war against how the majority of Muslims live at present and almost all the governments ruling them, using valid quotations and interpretations. And there are those who oppose them, including most of those governments, also using valid quotations and interpretations of Islam.
Western leaders’ and media’s mistake is not that they aren’t “anti-Islam” or that they are “pro-Islam” but that they don’t understand fully this conflict happening among Muslims, the contending forces, the stakes, and the nature of the struggle. Thus, dire Islamist enemies are often misjudged as friends merely because they aren’t violent at present or because they say soothing words to Western audiences, while genuinely moderate Muslims are shunned as “inauthentic” merely because they disagree with the radicals.
By Jessica Vaughan, CIS.org
Below is a synopsis of the information that has been released on Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad’s immigration history. It reveals a familiar pattern of a terrorist easily taking advantage of weak spots in America’s immigration system. Shahzad was admitted long before 9/11, but the openings he exploited are still in place today. Until policymakers move to shrink them, they offer a sobering guarantee of job security for counter-terrorism and security personnel for the foreseeable future. The Center for Immigration Studies also offers several policy recommendations that would reduce the risks inherent in U.S. visa and immigration programs.
Contrary to what some news media have stated, it is not completely clear that Shahzad always maintained legal status. In addition, there are aspects of his immigration history that indicate his possible awareness of how to work our system, suggesting this was neither a case of “home grown” terrorism, nor a case of “a legal immigrant’s failed American Dream,” as suggested by a CBS newscaster. Consider the following chronology, based on reporting by the New York Times.
by Daniel Pipes*
When news comes of Muslims engaging in violence, the triad of politicians, law enforcement, and media invariably presumes that the perpetrator suffers from some mental or emotional incapacity. (For a quick listing of examples, see my collection at “Sudden Jihad or ‘Inordinate Stress’ at Ft. Hood?“).
Denis MacEoin interviews Pervez Amirali Hoodbhoy*
Pervez Amirali Hoodbhoy (b. 1950) is one of South Asia’s leading nuclear physicists and perhaps Pakistan’s preeminent intellectual. Bearer of a Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, he is chairman of the department of physics at Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad where, as a high-energy physicist, he carries out research into quantum field theory and particle phenomenology. He has also been a visiting professor at the University of Maryland, College Park, and was visiting professor at MIT and Stanford. For some time, he has been a frequent contributor to Britain’s leading intellectual journal, Prospect. His extracurricular activities include a vocal opposition to the political philosophy of Islamism. He also writes about the self-enforced backwardness of the Muslim world in science, technology, trade, and education. His many articles and television documentaries have made a lasting impact on debate about education, Islam, and secularism in Pakistan. Denis MacEoin interviewed him by e-mail in October 2009.
by Phyllis Chesler
By now, we have all heard about Nujood Ali, the incredibly heroic ten year girl in Yemen who fled her abusive husband and demanded a divorce. This act was the first of its kind in a country where girls as young as eight are given away in marriage.
We want her as an ally. We want her counterparts in the Muslim world as allies. We want Mukhtaran Bibi on our side. She is the young Pakistani woman who was gang-raped by her alleged social superiors in order to cover up their other crimes. She escaped. She was not silenced by shame. She did not kill herself. Unlike Phoolan Devi, India’s Bandit Queen (a girl after my own heart), Bibi did not join a gang of outlaws and then exact personal revenge. Despite numerous death threats, Mukhtaran Bibi legally pursued the criminals — and won. Continue reading…
by Phyllis Chesler
The other day, a twenty-year-old woman was sold at an open auction in Badani Bhutto, Pakistan. Her brothers divided up the money. No one condemned this shameless and abominable act.
It is an act that haunts me.
A briefing by Patrick Clawson*
Patrick Clawson is an economist, deputy director of the Washington Institute of Near East Policy, and senior editor of the Middle East Quarterly. He graduated with a B.A. from Oberlin College in 1973 and a Ph.D. from the New School of Social Research in 1978. He taught at Seton Hall University in 1979-81 and served as an economist for the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. Mr. Clawson addressed the Middle East Forum on November 4, 2009 in Philadelphia.
Mr. Clawson’s talk revolved around two key points concerning the present situation in Iran.
A briefing by Joseph C. Myers*
Lieutenant Colonel Joseph C. Myers, recently named the Deputy Director of the Combined Joint Interagency Task Force-Nexus Afghanistan, is a career Infantry and Foreign Area Officer with extensive overseas experience. He just completed one year of service as a political-military affairs officer in the U.S. embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan. On September 29, LTC Myers addressed the Middle East Forum via conference call from Afghanistan.
by Supna Zaidi*
Despite being born at the same time as India, Pakistan seems to be regressing while India becomes an increasingly influential player in global politics. This is because Pakistan has refused to end the feudal system unlike India. Pakistani land reforms were first attempted in the 1950s by General Mohammad Ayub Khan’s government, who wanted, among other social improvements, to increase “agricultural output, promote social justice, and ensure security of tenure”. However, the regulations didn’t really break up large land holdings or reduce the power of the zamindars. The ceiling was placed on individual ownership, not on families, so land was simply distributed among the family members, thus leaving all the power and control with the zamindars.
by Daniel Byman
New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007. 375 pp. $30 ($18.99, paper)
Reviewed by Boaz Ganor*
Until the mid-1990s, international terrorism was generally considered to be state-sponsored. At one extreme, terrorist organizations motivated by communist ideology were receiving support from the USSR. The Soviets regarded these organizations as proxies — an inexpensive tool to promote the superpower’s interests all over the world and in conflict areas in particular. Such affiliated organizations could both challenge Soviet enemies and preserve and promote Soviet dominance and influence in conflict areas. For other states, such as Iran, Syria, and Libya, terrorism was considered a low-risk tool that could achieve various goals inexpensively in both the international and regional arenas.
You are currently browsing the archives for the Pakistan category.
Articles/Entries