Accept to be bullied, we’ll support you! So says our William Hague to the Palestinians

Israel-Palestine is perhaps the longest running and the most significant of International Conflicts of our time. Not only Middle East peace and stability depends on it, world peace, prosperity and stability rests on an amicable solution to the Middle East problem too. From the global super-power, the United States of America (USA) to Europe, Russia and other regional powers are equally involved. In fact, probably no other conflict has ever raised so much emotion as does this.

With Palestinians set to move for greater recognition and topping their status at the UN, certainly global powers, like the UK, is keen not to be seen to be on the wrong side. In desperate move, therefore, they push to save face with their ally, Israel, while maintain their influence over others. But the bottom line is, Israel has shown to be a blood thirsty aggressor with little regard for international law. As recently as early this month, we have seen yet again the eagerness on Israel’s part to wipe out an entire nation that is already under siege. Irony is, when the some self-appointed leaders of the world justify Israel’s heavy-handedness citing that Israel is under an existential threat from her neighbours, what they overlook, and I say deliberately, is that only Israel of any states in the modern time have demonstrated consistent willingness to subjugate neighbouring states, threatened their viability and deliberately obstruct their emergence as Independent nations though they have those rights at international law.

Coming back to my heading, I was ashamed, as a British Citizen, to see our Foreign Secretary, Mr William Hague, to come up with this most absurd line of reasoning – provide guarantee to return to negotiations unconditionally and assurance that you [Palestine] will not seek to extend Jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC) – and we [UK] will support you. Shame that despite our claim to be a nation of values, justice and fairness, our Mr Hague adopts the most unjust, unfair and irrational line. When ever you have seen justice requiring the oppressed providing guarantees?

I am afraid, my emotions like millions of other people, rise fast when it comes to Israel-Palestine/Middle East Conflict issue. But I shall refrain from making it too long. Let recite though this – Islamists are enemies of west, so we have heard, therefore prevent them from coming to power. But today, North Africa is ruled by the so called Islamists. West is keen to be in bed with them. We heard, Hamas was terrorist, so strangle them, but they are thriving, once PLO was terrorist organisation so was Mandela and his ANC. But justice may take longer to emerge victorious, but it certainly is the ultimate victor. Palestinians have a just cause and a rightful claim for which they have paid heavy price. Make no mistake, some day they will emerge as an Independent, viable and proud nation. Question is, are we ready to be on the part of justice or not? For Israel, the question is even more significant – Is Israel ready to accept a just settlement to the Palestinian cause or is it going to continue acting in its self-destruction? Only time will tell who ultimately has the wisdom to make the right, just and fair choice!

Misplaced optimism over US Anger on Israel

Joe Biden, the Vice President of the US, has expressed his displeasure at the latest plan by an Israeli Local Authority to build hundreds of new settlement homes in the Occupied East Jerusalem. In particular he criticises the timing of the declaration hinting at its effect on the eminent resumption of peace initiatives. Yesterday, the US State Department let it known through the press that Mrs Clinton has expressed her displeasure at the plan while talking to the the Prime Minister of Israel. It must be noted however, that Mr Biden appreciated the response of Mr Netanyahu, who criticises the local Jerusalem Municipality which approved the plans.
Given the close relationship between US and Israel and the strong political influence that Israel enjoys in the US, this latest expression of displeasure by the two major figures of US Administration come as surprise to many. Already, some commentators has began to express hope that perhaps time has come when US may be just about willing to harden up over Israel. They hope that US will finally show courage and free herself from pro-Israeli bias to bring genuine pressure on Tel Aviv to play fair.
However, this apparent harshness of US and the glimmer of optimism seems to be misplaced and premature, to say the least. For Israel has expressed no desire to call of the announced plan to build new settlement homes neither has the US demanded that it must stop. Furthermore, the Palestinian side remains divided and deeply engaged in internal power-fighting. The Global community, in particular EU and US is taking advantage of the disunity on the Palestinian sides to further their own ideological and hegemonic interests.
There are, of course, other more pressing issues which would make is almost impossible to reach a settlement. Million of Palestinians remain in refugee camps for three generations or perhaps even more denied of minimum standards of life. No body seems to be concerned of their conditions nor willing to play fair on their rights to return. The Palestinian Authority is weak and frail, totally dependant on the Masters in Washington, Brussels and Riyadh. Israel, for their part, is determined not to recognise Israeli Arabs living in Israel as equal to other citizens let alone allowing any more return to their homeland. The world community, for its part, seems to be too happy to forget the Palestinian refugees for now. That leaves aggrieved Palestinians convinced that only armed struggle can ultimately ensure justice for the oppressed and occupied people of the Holy Land of Palestine.
In the light of the situations on the ground, given the geo-political dynamics of our world and considering the complexity of the issue, a two-state solution with Israel and Palestine living side by side in harmony, peace and prosperity seems ever more illusional. Indeed, I, like many others, are now convinced that two-state solution is in fact impractical thinking and has always been an unrealistic expectation. Besides, a two-state solution defies established values of humanity, civility and justice. What's more is that two-state solution is an insult on the good people of Israel and Palestine where Jews, Christians and Muslims has lived for centuries in peace and harmony.
If a solution is to be achieved in the Middle East Conflict which we must, we need to redefine our values and re-formulate our strategies. We need to commit ourselves to achieving justice, human dignity and freedom for all people of the divine land. We then need to insist all the players that they accept these values and commit to them. Those who fail to live up to this demand must be confronted in all ways necessary. What this practically means is that we need to recognise the legitimate expectation of people to get back their own land, ensure equality of all citizens, establish system of governance representative of all people. Only then and then alone will we find a solution to a problem which has spanned over almost a century.

Published on The Financial Express on 20 March 2010.

Dangerous Precedence

The war on terror and the ‘strategic partnership’ between US and Pakistan in that war enters a new era. With Musharraf gone and the US strike in the Frontier province of Pakistan, a new phase seems to be under way. This is an important development signalling a major shift in international policy.
The war on terror resulted from the barbaric attacks on the twin towers in New York changed the dynamics of global geo-politics. Suddenly the established legal rules of respecting the integrity and sovereignty of Nation seems to have disappeared. The Invasion of Iraq, in the view of many authoritative figures, was an illegal war violating international laws. Now we see the mastermind of such gross violation, the single super-power of the present time, deliberately intrudes into yet another sovereign nation, Pakistan.
We wish not to doubt the sincerity of US authorities and accept that they are doing whatever is necessary to curb the rise of militancy and as such are hitting on all positions deemed safe heaven for the militants. We assume that US is not necessarily violating the territorial sovereignty of Pakistan and merely trying to be effective in their war by strategically targeting specific terror cells which incidentally happened to be in the Pakistan. Even with such acceptance and assumption, can we accept too that this act of the US is responsible and beneficial in their pursuit of the terrorists masterminds?
The reality is that the US, ever since the end of cold war began to feel confident in asserting its authority in international issues unilaterally. Their assured position of singular superpower offered them confidence which soon transformed into a kind of arrogance which reached its zenith at the time of Iraq invasion. The destruction caused in Iraq and the continued violence effectively marked the end of normal sovereign Iraq that we have known. The death toll of innocent civilians in Afghanistan, too, has long passed the US loss suffered in the twin tower. More shockingly, despite all of this, the world in which we live in is no more safe than it used to be, in many ways grown to be much more dangerous.
In truth, our world is now divided in three camps: one lead by the new-cons where significant proportion of the western population is induced to believe that somehow military might ought to be used to suppress the rise of ‘Islamic Extremism’ regardless of the legal position and the potential damage it may do to the international rules and law. The other camp, suffering the brunt of US arrogance feeling angry and aggrieved who are determined to fight the war with US regardless of their clear inferiority in strength. They are contempt to hate US and everything to do with US. Then there is third group of people, perhaps the majority, who genuinely are concerned about our world and yearns for a better solution but are either confused or marginalised.
The US leaves a dangerous legacy for the Human civilisation. The people of Pakistan and their friends across the world will feel aggrieved and shall seek revenge in whatever form they can. This will create another state detracted from ensuring better life style for its citizens and devoted to balance the competing factions of militant groups. The militant groups will find an increased population of aggrieved people to recruit from and the cycle of violence will continue. We just hope that the last 7 years of bloodshed and lost lives will force US administration to pause and look critically at its policies. We hope that US will follow a path of peace and stability by respecting international law and pursuing strategies not defiant of commonsense.

Instrument of Injustice

In recent years United Nations’ Security Council (UNSC) has been on the news to become synonymous with three issues: the war in Afghanistan, the Invasion of Iraq and the nuclear programme of Iran. Although I am sure UNSC undertakes a lot of other very important tasks, it seems on the surface to be driven by a specific group of nations united by a common agenda.
Invasion of Iraq proved UN to be almost ineffectual on the face of powerful nations not adhering to their commitment to the UN. US for example have defined its responsibilities in terms which suits them while also proved to the UN to be indispensable regardless of what she does. With Iran, US proved UNSC to be an organisation which ultimately will come to take US agenda as one of its own, be it somewhat watered down. The latest round of sanctions planned on Iran is just yet another example of such thus making UNSC an instrument of injustice which causes hardship in the life of ordinary people in relatively less militarily powerful nation.
One of course may feel that I have been little harsh towards the UN and have been ignorant of the important role she has played over the years to keep the order of our world. For this reason, it is must that I shall put some fact in the lines below to support my assertion. Here, I only intend to take the matter relating to Iran for today.
What are the issues involving Iran? A rogue state contempt to kill? A nation lead by fanatics? A power determined to destroy our world through funding extremists terrorists? Let us look at some facts to find the answers. But first we must look at the issue of nuclear proliferation and Iran. It is alleged that Iran is content to make bombs using nuclear technology which they must not be allowed to. Although Iran screams loud and clear to claim that their technology is for peaceful energy production purposes and shows no clear sign of making any bombs, US and some European countries continuously been raising their suspicion and demanding that Iran stop enriching uranium. Iran’s understood refusal gives reason to these nations to call for sanction and use their influence to use UNSC to pass resolution to this end.
Question is though how is it logical for nations already equipped with lethal weapons that includes powerful nuclear bombs decide Iran not having the right to poses the nuclear technology and know how for the purpose of producing electricity? Why should they be allowed to raise suspicion on an independent nation who has neither shown any sign of producing such bombs nor has acted aggressively? Every nation should have the right or no one, to develop nuclear technology. Even if we assume that Iran is going to make bombs, why must the nations causing chaos and carnage over centuries all across the world possessing nuclear bomb should have the authority to demand Iran must stop possessing nuclear enrichment technology just because they suspect them to be making bombs? Does that sound fair? Or Just? To me it sounds plainly illogical and clearly prejudicial.
Of course one of the reasons used to support the arguments to stop Iran from having nuclear technology is that Iran is an ‘unstable’ nation whose leaders must not be trusted or relied upon. This assertion is demeaning and must be seen as insulting to the people of Iran. The people of Iran in respectable numbers , far more than many so called western nations, turn out to vote to elect their leaders. The leaders of Iran are elected by their people legitimately to lead their nation. No one must have the right to question the wisdom of a people who have a history of civilisation unique to many nations.
For fear of lengthening my lines, I shall refrain from many more arguments which can be placed powerfully to prove the prejudice and hostility shown unjustly towards Iran. What I shall say to end however is that Iran is on the wrong side of a self proclaimed ‘force for good’ who take it upon themselves to discipline whichever nation step outside the limit set by these imperial arrogant powers with a desire for global domination. They chastise to further their own ‘interest’ at the core of which is to ensure the superiority of US and her allies at the expanse of all others. Iran is a bad apple strategically placed to challenge the supremacy of a major ill of our world, Israel. Sadly, UN has proved itself to be a force, an instrument of these nations to use to legitimise their actions. This way, they use UN and various organs of her to cause suffering, injustice and carnage around the world. UN is no longer a force for good guarding the peace and stability of our world. In fact, UN now is an instrument to legitimise injustice, a weapon of oppression and global dominance for a few.

Published in the Daily Star in Bangladesh on Wednesday, 30th January 2008: http://www.thedailystar.net/story.php?nid=21142.

Sanctions against Iran disregards Sovereignty of Nations

US step up sanctions against Iran for their alleged support for terrorism. The measures target the Revolutionary Guards and three state owned Banks. This comes only days after the former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair comparing Iran with the rise of fascism in the 1920s. He went as far as almost explicitly framing Iran as the New Fascists of our century, warning ‘western’ powers against complacency. Days before Mr Blair’s pronouncements, the Russian President Vladimir Putin visited Iran in a historic tour, the first ever of any Russian Leader for over half a century. Given the strategic importance of Iran, it is important to look at the issues at stake. It is important because the US-Iran represents the latest most important issues that can destroy the peace and stability of our world.

It is relatively easy to deal with the issue of Terrorism. US accuses Iran of arming fighters in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Hamas and Hezbollah. For US have listed Hamas and Hezbollah as terrorist organisations and is fighting against the insurgents in Afghanistan and Iraq. For the ease of ordering, we will deal with the issue of Iraq and Afghanistan first.

Afghanistan was attacked by the US and her allies soon after the attack on Twin Tower in New York by a group of terrorists which came to be known as the 9/11 attacks. US cited the involvement of Taliban, then ruler of most of Afghanistan and hold them responsible for providing grounds for training and accommodating terrorists. Although in military terms US ousted Taliban from power with little hardship, they continue to face increasingly stronger challenges from the Taliban element which questions the achievement of the ‘allied’ forces in Afghanistan. At present, given the difficulty in finding countries willing to commit troops, there is a real danger that Taliban may again gain grounds. Amid the fear of the return of Taliban in some form, US is desperate to step up pressure on Taliban while shift the focus of US people away from the issues. Iran, being a non-friendly nation to the US and strategically important Neighbour of Afghanistan is an easy escape goat. To date there has been little credible evidence to support Iran’s involvement in arming the Taliban. In fact, history tells us that the Taliban was ousted with silent support from Iran.

In Iraq, US and allied forces are struggling to keep hold of their grounds. The country is in chaos with little progress in sight. Despite the best efforts of the US soldiers, the security situation is in dire, the economy is frail and confidence of people is extremely low. There has been little movement towards stabilisation and the growth of democracy; the government is in tatters. More and more nations are bringing back their forces back, leaving US to sort out the mess it created alone. The opposition to Iraqi occupation is increasing in the US with the election eminent. The Bush administration is failing to keep up its commitment. Yet again they need an escape goat in order to wash their hands off the incompetence and arrogance and who better to blame than a worried neighbour, Iran? Of course the story is familiar; Syria has also been blamed but since Syria poses little significance these days, Iran as the most influential nation in that region suits better. Note again, there has been little evidence to make a compelling case against Iran in arming the Iraqi fighters.

Supposing, for the sake of argument, that Iran indeed is harbouring resistance to US occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, would US be justified to take the measures it is taking against Iran? I doubt it especially if US is to follow its own standards. Meddling in others business, destabilising nations and violating sovereignty of other states have been a common feature of successive US administrations. Even to date, US justify all kinds of actions based on its ‘self interest’. Is it not in the interest if Iran to have a favourable government in its strategically important neighbouring states?

With regards to Hezbollah and to some extent Hamas, Iran have been an open supporter of their causes. For centuries nation after nation supported independence struggles of the people against occupation. US itself fought bloody war to achieve its own freedom. Hamas and Hezbollah have been created under very specific conditions to achieve clear objectives. Both these movements are based on popular support within their respective communities. There is little evidence that they force people in supporting them, in fact, both these movements gained reputation for being fair, just and not corrupt. People in their respective areas see these movements as saviours of their cause. Yet the US and its allies continue to support increasingly isolated forces accused of corruption on mass scale. US talk of democracy and freedom yet denies ground realities and throws her weight behind occupying forces and corrupt, self proclaimed leaders with waning public support.


There are other accusations against Iran which deserves to be discussed with much importance. However for today we shall limit our focus on the issue of terrorism. It is clear to any reasonable person with a fair mind and sense of justice that the accusations against Iran of supporting terrorism are based in thin grounds. If anything, it has been the US continuously threatening Iran from all around with huge force. Iran has reason to believe that it may be subject to an attack from the US and may take precautionary measure. As such, it is conceivable that Iran is being forced to improve their strategic understanding with the forces opposing US hegemony.
The attitude of the US amounts to clear disrespect for international Institutions and the sovereignty of independent states. She has violated the sovereignty of more than one nation and continues to threaten more. This kind of attitude reflects the arrogance of the neo-conservative led administration and poses the greatest danger to our world’s security. Let us hope that the presidential election being just round the corner, common sense will prevail and a major shift will be in place in the US to prevent us going back to the olden days of cold war.

Let Burma be our moment of Reckoning

Situation in Burma continues to be tense with each side determined to see the end. The military junta continues to do all it can to suppress protesters while the pro-democracy activists demonstrate despite the harsh realities. The world, despite some sound bites, observes as bystander. In the mean time, some of us wonder what future holds for Burmese people and the significance of this latest development at the international scene.

For decades now, Burma has been governed by the military elites who established tight control over the state apparatus. They have ruthlessly suppressed all efforts of the pro-democracy activists and imprisoned the leaders. International community only managed to occasionally express concern in words but nothing beyond that has taken place. Meanwhile, in other parts of the world, in the name of ensuring democracy and ushering new era, global powers undertaken expansive military adventures result of which is the messy Iraq, dysfunctional Palestine and the increased uncertainty over global stability.

The test as presented by the Burmese experience is this: how far can international community can go to ensure ‘democracy’ in a state? From what we are experiencing, the answer is that the extent to which international community can go to ensure democracy, rule of law and respect for fundamental human rights is very limited. Of course some would argue that the case of Burma is different in that it does not offer much respite for the only super power to intervene, nor does it inconvenience any of the global players. To proponent of this view, Anglo-US axis has no moral vision and shows little regards to defend democracy; rather they are driven by self interest. While those that sees the axes as the sole custodian of democracy will argue that the Bush lead west perhaps with active participation of the European Union should if necessary take military stand against the Burmese government to ‘free’ the people of Burma from the unimaginable sufferings implicated upon them by their own government. In reality, both of these camps are impractical and unrealistic in the views that they hold.

The war on Iraq, the Palestine Crisis and most recently the increasingly eminent war on Syria points to us that war can only break our peaceful world into suspecting blocks where suspicion, mistrust and lack of cooperation makes it almost impossible to achieve peace and stability. It is also witnessed over the years that however powerful a nation or group of nations may be, they still are unable to mount military challenge in every land where the values of commonly acceptable civility is being violated. We have seen that action in Darfur has been limited to diplomacy and verbal condemnation, Chechnya, Dagestan, Kashmir etc have long been forgotten. In fact, as recently as last week, the British Foreign Secretary himself admitted that while there is victory, there is no military solution. This is extraordinary given that it was this very person who was the tsar of Tony Blair’s policy making.

SO leaving aside the rhetoric, it is now time to take a pragmatic approach to our world’s problems. Our approach should be one of re-conciliation between parties, building bridges and mending differences. War is easy but bringing peace is difficult. There are enough conflicts and potential conflicts, there are far too many potential issues that can divide our world and lead us to devastating consequences. With Burma now dominating the airwaves, we do not need yet another military solution, yet another war in whatever form it may take place. What we need is real courage and determination to come up with creative ideas that will pave the way for a better Burma and indeed a better world.

To this end, it goes back to the old argument in which international institutions like that of UN must be strengthened and their authority well established. TO do so, all nation and most importantly the powerful nations must respect the authority of these institutions even if at times the interest of these nations are not well served. Along with this, we also need to develop an infrastructure, a culture in which no nation is left to be isolated and cornered into little cells. We need effective means of communications with regimes like the one in Burma so we can talk in time of crisis. For this to happen, the authorities in such countries must not feel threatened. We need to create an interdependent world in which no government is able to run its businesses entirely on its own. That way when there is a problem we can apply real pressure that will work.

Isolating countries whether it is Burma or North Korea, be it Iran or Syria, will only make the leadership of such nations ever more determined in going about doing just the kind of things we want them no to do. Allowing them space and time may in short term seem giving way to the ideologically wrong kind of people, but in long term it allows us to weaken those regimes by making them more reliant on others who in turn can force these regimes to change. For the regimes, since they would be used in communicating and cooperating with other regimes, it would be unthinkable for them to isolate and do their businesses alone.
Let therefore our message be one of reconciliation, peace and perseverance. Let us say in loud and clear language, no more songs of wars, no more aggressive tactics to ensure ‘democracy’ but to create space for everyone and give them time to learn to dream of a better world. We want to see an end to the bloody clashes in Burma, but that must be achieved without creating more bloodshed at greater scale. Burma should be our moment of reckoning where we resolve to strengthen international institutions and increase our capacity to deal with this kind of regimes.

West has no monopoly over human rights

In recent years the words ‘Democracy’, ‘Human rights’ and ‘civilised’ has become a very common. Often these words are used by the self proclaimed ‘righteous’ guardians of our world to attack the ‘enemies’ of the ‘civilised nations’ who form the axis of evil. Two leaders who use these words most are two staunchest allies, Tony Blair and George W Bush, The prime minister and president of the United Kingdom and the United States respectively. The country who felt the most heat from the use of these words and often been subject of Anglo-US wrath is none other than the Islamic Republic of America. What strange however is that often the Iranian regime have been criticised for ‘suffocating’ the people of Iran and curtailing their freedom through ‘undemocratic’ regime in Tehran. Interestingly enough never has there been any clear and elaborate explanation for such exertion and no serious attempt has been made to undertake an objective study of the matters. Interesting too that our great media institutions who pride in themselves for their objectivity never questioned the validity of such assertion, never has they given opportunity to the Iranians either to defend themselves.

It is important that we do not lose our sight of the need for objectivity. With this in mind, I shall attempt to present my views which I hope would be the views of many others here in relation to some of the issues that Iran is accused of instigating.

The most powerfully used phrase against the Iranians is often the power of the Ayatollahs and as such the regime is often being labelled as ‘theocratic’. As a result in the views of some, Iran is a nation without democracy in which individuals, the ordinary men and women have no freedom. How true is this assertion? Let us analyse and make our mind.

The Iranian system of governance is slightly unique in that it has an elected parliament, an elected president and a supreme leader who is not directly elected. On a day to day basis, the president runs the country with his cabinet, the group of ministers while parliament keeps the government accountable by scrutinising and legislating. The supreme leader rarely gets involve in the running of the government and only on issues of great national importance he intervenes. In most cases however, the role of the Supreme leader is one of a guardian protecting nation’s socio-cultural religious identity and values. And it is on issues of cultural, social and religious matters or other matters with socio-religious and cultural implication the supreme leader steps in to reflect the mood of the people and to unite fighting factions. Where is the wrong in having a figure that remains extremely popular in the position like that of the supreme leader of the Iran? Many other countries have such arrangements in the form of monarchy etc.

The president, arguably the chief executive, elected directly by the people in secret ballots and there has never been allegation of fraudulent activities involving the ballots. Why is it than the Iranian president than should be seen as anything less than democratic? The parliament has a decisive role and the parliament is elected too. Most of the municipalities have elected leaders or representatives of the people, why should Iran than be labelled as anything other than democratic? If we compare Iranian democracy with that of the US, what can we say? We see in the US a system in which money and Brand determine leaders who will govern the people of the United States; we see the grip of corporate big fishes having most part of the ‘pie’. Even on election, the system is marred by allegation of manipulation. President Bush came to power in the first place when clearly he lost the popular vote and that was excluding the votes that then were declared invalid due to systems designed to favour the republicans. Millions of people even now are deprived of their right to vote either through administrative hiccups, or using draconian laws. How can than the US of all the states claim an upper and morally superior position on issue of democracy?

With regards to Human rights, where is the clear proof that Iran falls short on its commitment to human rights than those who attack them? Take the example of the ‘custodians’ of human rights world wide, the US and the UK. United States is still a country deeply divided along the racial lines where colours of skin play major role as to what kind of treat should a person get. We have seen after the events in New Orleans, in relation to the American Muslims and Arabs and others that USA is far from being a country in which freedom flourishes without violation of human rights. Still there are draconian roles that victimise its own citizens and undermines equality of all people. Of course, I have not yet mentioned the appalling and disgraceful Guantanamo which is a scar in the consciousness of the world. How than the United States has the right to criticise anyone else of violation of Human rights? Even if we compare, can we find an equivalent of Guantanamo in Iran? Are there laws that discriminate among its people? Is there such neglect, prejudice or negative measure in Iran against any part of its population? I doubt very much.

There are other allegations such as people are forced to cover in specific ways. But which country does not have limitations? There are cultural and social requirements unique to each nation, people who cannot accept such cultural realities just have to live with it, and that is life. We cannot have unlimited freedom, we must exercise our freedom responsibly without showing contempt for others, their ways of life. True we cannot imagine a lady wearing mini skirts in the Iran, but why should we expect such freedom where sexually implicit and culturally alien matters Iranian society? And even if we are to criticise Iran, why should we not look at others too who have similar draconian measures? Jack Straw found veil not conducive to British society and unhelpful to integration and community cohesion, France finds Hijab at schools contrary to its secular values, Turkey finds Hijab not compatible with their values and tradition, why have we not criticise them for their anti-freedom attitude? Answer is simple, the west lead by the US and European powers are not interested in justice and equality, they are not bothered about respect for others, they have a specific agenda, an agenda in which they wants to see they, and them alone prevail. In the words of a great scholar, writer and thinker, Muhammad Asad, the western views regarding Islam is one of the following: ‘instead of liberating the human spirit from the shackles of obscurantism, Islam rather tightens them; and, consequently, the sooner the Muslims peoples are freed from their subservience to the Islamic beliefs and social practices and induced to adopt the western way of life, the better for them and for the rest of the world…’ These words may have been written long before our current time, never the less the views and attitudes of the western governments towards Muslims is precisely that. When such are the views held by the western powers, not just Iran, any country that rise up in its own right without recourse to western nepotism, they will be criticised, marginalised and where possible destroyed by forces or otherwise. I hope however, that the views of the people of the west are one of mutual respect, and it is time to challenge the prevailing thoughts of our politicians in the west.

For so long the illegal Israeli occupation remains, our support for Palestine shall continue

Israel is an evil impetus causing enormous grief an incredible hardship and suffering for millions of people. The Zionist empire based in a dream that demeans all people but those of Jews ancestry seeks to impose its will and hegemony over the defenceless people of Palestine and continues to exert whatever pressure, however draconian and ruthless the consequence may be, on the people of Palestine and others in the immediate neighbourhood. The criminality of unprecedented scale some times directly inflicting chaos and destruction on others, and often via hidden means continues to be a major issue on world peace. It would not be too much to say that was it not for the Zionist policies of the Israeli evil empire, the whole of Middle East and indeed the world would have been a much better, secure and stable place. So when I see an article on a news monitoring site of Bangladesh ‘articulating’ how Bangladesh is loosing out from a principles stand to boycott Israel it indeed saddens me.

The article published on NFB presents to us the ‘human and caring’ face of Israel, a site which often is unseen! Israel has acquired some of the ‘best’ best facilities in cardiovascular treatment, agriculture and other important areas. The author informs us of the enormous ‘good’ the effort of Israeli government brings to the world through sharing their expertise in training and helping the people in the poor world. The author tells too of the offer by Israelis to help Bangladesh for no apparent interest to Israel which the BNP led government apparently refused to take. I should have been of course annoyed at the government of my country for depriving the poor and needy people of the chance to be treated by some of the best professional in health, agriculture and other infrastructure development! But sadly I cannot.

It seems that the author’s main argument was to present the kind heartedness of the Israeli government and a genuine desire by them to be a force for good. I wish I could accept such attempt, instead I find it incredible that author felt us to be so foolish that we will not understand the clever stunt by the Israeli to gain some cheap sympathy in its mission to wipe our Palestine.

If for the sake of argument I accept that the effort by Israel to help others is genuine and therefore should be commended, it is only natural to look at the greatest contribution that Israel can may to the humanity. Thousands of people killed by illegal and barbaric Israeli aggression in Palestine, Lebanon and other places, Israel continue to randomly arrest, detain and imprison people of Palestinian origin for months and years. As I write this article, illegal Israeli incursion in the Gaza strip results in the arrest of democratically elected government ministers among others. It is clear that Israel has no regard for the lives of the Palestinian, no desire to end the illegal occupation and no plan to stop their land grabbing policy. Clearly too that Israel wishes never a stable middle east in which each nation flourish with full potential as such outcome will threaten Israel’s superiority. The position taken, however old or ‘antiquated’ the ban may be, it was a decision taken in solidarity of our Palestinian brothers and sister and to show our support for their cause. The ground on which the decision was taken has not change, if any it has gone worse. Of course it is true that many other countries have changed their position. But that is only because those countries lost its courage and have now converted into ‘American out Posts in the Middle east’. It is unfortunate of course to see the last lines in that article that seeks to threaten Bangladesh of US wrath. But I am not at all surprised as US has shamelessly supported the illegal state of Israel and will continue to do so. It is true that country like Bangladesh rely heavily on the goodwill and support of countries like the United states of America, true too that the people of Bangladesh value the friendship with US people, but that does not follow that Bangladesh and her government will be willing give way to bullying by people like Hannah Brown in accepting the state of Israel’s ill and evil destructive actions.

The people of Bangladesh have suffered for centuries in the hand of foreign masters and are fully aware of the humiliation, and hardship of life under occupation. The heroic nation that is my Bangladesh knows too of the difficulties and price often required staying on the ‘wrong’ side of the powerful. But our people also knows to remain firm and steady on the face of injustice and have fought and stood against injustice. For so long as the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestine will remain, the solidarity and support of the people of Bangladesh will also continue to be with the Palestinian brothers and sisters. To even think of luring us and bullying us to form ‘noble ties’ with Israel is if anything an insult to our feeling, our values and our principles.

Behind the Attacks lies a greater ambition to build an American Empire

History has been made today with a landmark meeting in Bagdad, the meeting between US envoy and Iranian Ambassador. This is the first high level contact between the countries in 30 years. Whatever the outcome may have been the meeting itself is a step towards the right direction which must be commended. Hopefully more meetings of this kind in the future will eventually bring about normal relationship between the two countries both with distinct history.

The meeting reported on BBC’s website as ‘US warns Iran over arming Iraqis’. Following the positive gloss on the meeting above it is unfortunate that a major news corporation fails to report an important event more positively. On a broader point however, reading the US feedback on the meeting, they very characteristically attacks the Iranian and warns them to ‘stop arming Iraqis’.

The US attack on the independent sovereign Iraq has been a blunder, the greatest mistake of George Bush’s career. The war on Iraq has come to haunt the neo-cons in spectacular fashion marred in controversy and perhaps incompetence though many would say rather arrogance failed their intelligence. What is clear however now is that amid increasing dissatisfaction and eroding support for the president and his project at home and isolated and ridiculed image of the US administration abroad left the master at the White House and Pentagon wonder for solutions. Their failure of astronomical magnitude costing lives and money at a frightening even to think. No body knows of the total death tolls of Iraq civilians and every day dozens more are dying. The country and its infrastructure are in tatters leaving a one time rich and advance nation in ruins. The failure to manage Iraq and bring about normalisation is increasingly frustrating the US administration who now finds an easy escape goat on Iran, an isolated nation being victim of US imperial vision.

But should we be surprised at the US’s hypocritical role with regards to Iran? Let’s briefly list some of the issues that US has with Iran: Nuclear, Arming Insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan and supporting Hezbollah and the likes. Of course the neo-cons and their allies also allege the Iranian regime to be theocratic who are suffocating the people of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Iran was labelled as member of the ‘Axis of Evil’ pronounced by the president in a famous speech. I shall seek to address each of these in brief below.

The issue of Nuclear energy and suspected military motives by the Iranian regime is one of total and utter nonsense, indefensible by any logic. To start with, the forces demanding the Iranian regime to give up their nuclear ambition themselves are armed with most sophisticated nuclear technology perhaps would not be possible for Iran to ever match and they continue to increase and enhance their capability both at the civil and military arena. To prevent Iran and to bully them to stop nuclear activities is the greatest hypocrisy of our time. There are other unstable regimes with nuclear bombs who instead of being forced to give up their weapons are being helped actively and empowered to strengthen their capability, India just one such nation who have a history of fighting with its neighbours, continues to have interesting relationship with most of its neighbours. India is also a country entrenched into sectarian fighting and many of her provinces are unstable as a result of ‘independence movement’ by various groups. How than is it justifiable that a nation who have been engaged in unprovoked war on more than one occasion with more than one nation is allowed to be empowered with nuclear forces and aided by the US yet when Iran, relatively small nation who never fought an aggressive war and clearly states no desire to acquire military nuclear technology be forced to abandon her projects? Why should there be a ban on Iran’s effort when clearly they have neither broken any role nor threatened or shown any sign of aggression? The only answer is Iran refuses to be a US poodle in a region where most others are happy to do so thus represent a threat to US-Israeli dominance in the oil rich region of our world which also happens to be the heart of a major religion with a global vision.

Iran seen a change over three decades ago, a change that brought an end to the most ruthless and autocratic regime in her entire history. The Islamic revolution was a mass movement of the people who reclaimed their right to govern themselves free from the suppression of ruthless dictator. Ever since the revolution the regimes in Iran have been elected democratically by the popular vote of her citizens contrary to the picture painted in the west. Iran is the only Middle Eastern country to have a thorough democratic system where man and women all participate. Contrary to the claims made by the neo-cons, the government in Iran has better democratic credential than President Bush for it was Bush who ashamed great American democracy by loosing the popular vote yet gaining the presidency.

The rise of the current Iranian political elites to the power came as a result of a stated commitment to fight aggression and help others to free themselves from occupation and dictatorship. As such Iran committed itself to help occupied people of Palestine and Lebanon to mobile their numbers to force occupiers out of their land. Most nation in history have done so, there is nothing inherently wrong in doing so. Even to date, US continue to arm support and fund more rebel and other groups to destabilise more countries than Iran can ever dream of doing. US’s role in funding extremist armed groups is well known and continues to date including currently funding an Iranian dissident group which has been branded ‘terrorist’ organisation by various international entities. Most recently, they have also actively supported a quo against the democratically elected government of Venezuela. The support for Israel and its illegal occupation continues to be a shame on American nation.

The arguments can be built, fact however is that the arrogance of American administrations means little does these arguments means. In affect however, beneath all the words and arrogance lies an ambitious desire to build a new empire spanning the whole world in which only America and her allies will have the ultimate say. Countries like Iran are an obstacle in achieving such vision thus prevented from pursuing legitimate means to strengthen and advance their national interests.

Birth of a new Dawn is inevitable

During the summer of 2006 the people of Lebanon found themselves caught in the midst of fire. The memories of brutal war made a come back destroying live, infrastructure and indeed the whole of Lebanon. Beautiful suburbs and lively streets in Beirut came to a standstill amid the devastation of astronomical scale caused by mighty Israeli shelling from air, sea and land. Though the war raged in full swing for weeks, and despite clear military advantage to Israel, the will of the people of Lebanon, the determined defence of highly committed Hezbollah forces meant Israel came out of the war as the wounded lion that lost its pride. The people of Lebanon and indeed the whole of Arab for first time in modern age felt proud of their strengths, not the governments and leaders but the people found heroes in the men of Hezbollah. These experiences undoubtedly led the leadership of Hezbollah confident who immediately after the war attempted to strengthen their grips in the corridors of power in Beirut.

A year later now that we approach the summer once again, people in Lebanon yet again finds themselves in the midst of war-noises. This time the attacks and the parties of the war no longer are the old enemies, the Israelis against defenceless Lebanese, but rather, the Lebanese Army laying siege against Palestinian refuges apparently taken hostage by a militant group. This development brings about yet again bitter memories of the past when multi racial, multi-faith Lebanon was engulfed in horrific civil war primarily fought along the religious lines. Already Hezbollah made their views known while the government continuing to show their determination to go ahead with ‘finishing’ their business. Recognising the strengths of the militants and potential support from powerful political blocks, military equipments and other necessary resources have already been channelled to the Lebanese army from the US and other Middle Eastern countries. Irony of course is that the Americans only last summer supported the Israeli effort in all forms against this very government even on the face of massive civilian casualties and clear violation of international laws by the Israeli warmongers. Although they argue to help the Lebanese army to increase and improve its capacity, reality is the result of a strengthen Lebanese army and continued siege on the refugees camp will only weaken the Lebanese government and bring about destruction of Lebanese infrastructure and society. There is no interest to be served by the Lebanese as far as the USA is concerned. The only outcome that will satisfy the US and in turn their masters in Tel Aviv is the outcome that will ensure a fragile Lebanon divided along sectarian lines, this latest crisis will go much far into achieving such objectives.

Interesting it is to see how this crisis unfolds. The effort of the Lebanese army is seen as a war against al-Qaeda necessary to defeat the forces of ‘evil’ threatening our global stability. Interesting too to see how other major obstacles to US ambition to control the Middle East are shown to be ‘engaged’ in this conflict. I of course am talking about Iran and Syria. Only this morning Walid Jumblatt, the leader of the Druze Community pronounced the lines so loved by the USA unchallenged by BBC in the Sunday AM programme where he sensed active Syrian and Iranian hands behind the escalation of the current crisis. Irony of course is that these are the lines also expresses the views of Neo-conservative ideologues in the Washington and beyond. It would be significant therefore to see how this latest crisis unfolds in Lebanon. What is clear however that certain forces with deep interest in the region will continue to see an unstable middles east to further their interest. What we of course do not hear is the potential gain by the USA from this conflict. Let’s just look at two such gains.

While the Lebanese siege continues, Israel suffocates the Palestinians, arrests the members of democratically elected government and continues to strengthen its grips on the Palestinian territory. In fact, it is evident that while the media spotlight continues to be away from Gaza, Israel aims to force the Palestinian government of Ismael Hniya to become dysfunctional by arresting his ministers and threatening to kill as many of his activist as possible. All these happen of course while media, especially in the west continues to avoid giving any coverage on the issue. The middles eastern powers too seem to be not bothered by the developments.

It would not be a bad thing to get rid of the ‘evil forces’ if it was to ensure peace and stability in the Middle East forever. The difficulty of course is that the forces identified by the Us-Israeli axis and their allies to be the ‘forces of evil’ continues to enjoy popular support by standing for the rights of the oppressed on the face of mighty enemy while the self proclaimed ‘forces of good’ remains deeply attached to committing evil deeds. Their allies hoping silently to see the end of the popular movements on the other hand continues to lose their grips on power and becoming increasingly unpopular. If this story continues, we shall continue to go round the cycles without ever finding a solution for the deeply troubled region that has so much influence in our lives, in deciding our future.

The peace loving people of the world must demand, and the self proclaimed leaders of the ‘civilised world’ must first stop associating themselves with the evil regime of the Zionists in Israel. Justice must be put before any other consideration regardless of the potential consequences. As an immediate step, Israeli incursion and continued detention of Palestinian people must come to an end and the Unity Government of Ismael Haniya must be given a chance to bring about order, run his country and rebuild the economy. The government of the Palestinian people must be allowed to rule their country free of interference from the outer world. Once the current situation is neutralised, tension reduced and normality return on the streets of Palestine, pressure must be brought about on Israel to give up its settlement of the west Banks and return to internationally recognised borders. Pressure must also be ensured on Israel to force her in accepting the refugees or compensate them if they so wish to be duly which will bring an end to lifelong imprisonment of generations of Palestinians spread all over the world.

There are of course those, in fact the dominant factions of global power, who argues that Israelis must be given assurance of security and left unattacked and undisturbed for any settlement to take place. This argument defies common logic and runs contrary to commonly accepted protocol. The people of Palestine are desperate, under occupation they have lost their loved ones, their homes, their lands and of course their freedom, what hope do they have of living a fulfilling life in an independent Palestine? How can we demand desperate people living in total despair accepting responsibility for situations in which they never played any major rule? The response from the Palestinian side, however harsh may look, is a response that should reasonably be expected from any occupied people, they are merely defending and in most cases seeking to regain the lost honour, dignity and pride, their country and their homes. Surely, for them to stop a clear progress must be made in ensuring their return to their homes, their freedoms must be brought in sight for them to stop fighting for it.
Coming back to the original issue, I was talking of two gains by the Israel-US and their allies from keeping Middle East chaotic. I mentioned one above with regards to Israel Palestine. The other major gain is that given the role of the USA in the middle eastern politics and their biased and totally unjustified stand over many years in supporting Israeli aggression, the continued biased of USA against Muslims and those who aspire to see Islam prevail, even the name of USA should have caused enormous anger in the middles east. The infighting within Middle Eastern society ensures that USA is in demand. As mentioned before, despite the USA role in Israel’s attempt to destroy Lebanon, Lebanese government turn to USA for help in its internal fight, Saudi Arabia remains dependant on USA fearing potential uprising bringing an end to the rule of the House of Saud, Fattah relies on US support to regain its control over Palestinian people and the list can continue. It is not in the interest of the US and indeed the ‘west’, therefore, to see an end to Middle Eastern violence. On this backdrop, therefore, it is not realistic to expect a solution with US at the driving sit. On the other hand, without the US involvement a solution is unthinkable, thus the conclusion is that there is no solution to Middle East problem. The only way out therefore is a new renaissance in the middles east, a renaissance bringing about empowerment of people, true democracy that ensures people’s participation in the governance of their country. For such time to become reality, a new grass root level activity must now be the focus of all peace loving determined people of the Middle East. Only when the puppets are driven out power will we see a truly stable middle east. Of course in the process there will be bloodshed, chaos and conflicts, there will be bitterness and pain. But the pain and bitterness is like the unbearable suffering of a mother prior to birth, once the birth of the new dawn takes place, all pain shall wane away ushering a new era of peace, stability and humanly love and kindness. Of course, there will be the death of the ‘birth giving mother’ as it so happens in real life, but the success if inevitable, however long it may take.