South Asia Features
Outside View: India terror aftermath - Greater integration needed
By Frank Kaufmann Nov 29, 2008, 18:18 GMT
A view of Taj Mahal hotel in Mumbai on 29 November 2008 after operation by the security personal has finally reached its end. EPA/HARISH TYAGI
This morning's AP headline reads "Pakistan U-turns on sending spy chief to India." Three links down on the Google "news page," its collection of links is the Hollywood Today headline: "Mumbai Massacre Now Linked to Pakistan: War to Follow?" making it clear that those who generate current world problems are not merely the lawless and conscience-less villains at the extremes, but rather that our problems stem with near equal abundance from dysfunction, irresponsibility and dangerous blindness in the heart of the "mainstream."
While my heart grieves for the innocent in India, a country so beloved to me, I struggle to suppress a heart of anger at institutions like Hollywood Today. I struggle for a moment to cling to the ideal of free press in moments like this. The problem is that the term "free" is false. The vast amount of world media slaves under its yolk of its economic need or lust, and this is not freedom. It is bondage. A cure must be found.
Yet the problem of living more responsibly, and with a more reasonable and holistic grasp of political life, lies not only with much needed reform of media, but also with "the body politic," namely us. We must make it increasingly possible for political leaders to have the breathing room they need to navigate sensitive and fragile territory, especially it hair trigger moments.
The AP article leads with the observation:
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) — Pakistan on Saturday withdrew an offer to send its spy chief to India to help investigate the Mumbai terrorist attacks, damaging efforts to head off a crisis between the nuclear-armed rivals.
Indian officials have linked the attacks to "elements" in Pakistan, raising the prospect of a breakdown in painstaking peace talks between South Asian rivals that has alarmed the U.S.
First, how does it help to desribe these countries as rivals? Everyone are rivals in some areas. And they are partners, collaborators or neutral in others. This is true for India and Pakistan. Why could not the copy read, "painstaking peace talks between South Asian neighbors"? Is this any less true?
Secondly, if indeed this week's horrifying attacks in Mumbai are linked to "elements in Pakistan," why should this be reported as "raising the prospect of a breakdown in painstaking peace talks between South Asian rivals"? Surely there is a vast likelihood that the Mumbai attacks are linked to "elements in Pakistan." Any 10 year old could tell us that. Shocking news would be if the attacks were not at ALL linked to ANY elements in Pakistan. In our world today, everything is linked, and it is like reporting that someone breathed in then breathed out to note the likelihood that terrorists link across national boundaries. Why should such a pat, dull observation "raise the prospect of a breakdown in painstaking peace talks"? Surely Prime Minister Singh was not suggesting that the government of Pakistan was smuggling soul-less animals into Mumbai to shoot up Indian guests and citizens.
The primary point of the AP article notes that Gilani reversed an earlier agreement to send the head of the Inter Services Intelligence agency, had been changed so that a lower-ranking intelligence official would travel instead.
OK. Yes, this can be seen as a disappointment certainly. But it is understandable. Gilani received sharp criticism from Pakistani opposition politicians and a cool response from the army, which controls the spy agency. How hard is that to figure out? Everyone knows the difficulty and stranglehold domestic partisanship poses for national leaders. This is what I mean when I say we (as the body politic) should think in ways that is supportive, helpful, constructive, and reasonable. And we should refuse to continue consuming news presented in ways that we simply know better. These realities are not complicated. Give the leaders room. Let us and the media stop playing pretend. We already know the story. Every national leader is a target from domestic opposition. Each country has a different power configuration, and things are hard.
For these reasons, the greater the persistence for quiet back channels to remain open among leaders the better we can move forward toward peace. Let Gilani and Singh stay in constant communication, and let common sense world citizens support them in all ways to deepen bonds and shared hopes and needs in the region.
The US, despite the decline of its reputation under the current administration, is always a powerful influence in global affairs. Presently nations must navigate quite a radical transition: The current US administration has being trying to persuade Islamabad to shift its security focus from India, with which it has fought three wars, to Islamic militants along the Afghan border, whereas President-elect Barack Obama has identified rapprochement between India and Pakistan as a main plank of his plan to stabilize Afghanistan and defeat al-Qaida.
The former mentioned pressure from the current administration is self-serving and short sighted, whereas the Obama position reflects insight into how stabilization expands. Should India and Pakistan succeed to develop a unified, harmonized and integrated alliance, every last sector of human enterprise in the region would flourish a hundred fold. Such a rich horizon, more than anything else would seek its own natural call through the northwest borders inviting all to the benefits of peace and prosperity.
In the dreams of such a time let us all, especially media, serve such hopes with a more constructive and more common sense to the obvious realities of life and the simple to understand challenges of national leaders.
Frank Kaufmann is the director of the Inter Religious Federation for World Peace. The opinions here are his own.
COMMENT
blog comments powered by DisqusLatest Headlines in South Asia
- 1. Sri Lanka leftist party says leader, activist are abducted
- 2. US agrees to let Afghan forces take lead in night raids
- 3. India, Pakistan leaders want better ties
- 4. Pilot killed in crash of Bangladesh Air Force jet
- 5. Pakistani president visits India for lunch meeting, prayers
Older Talkback
page: 1
Hi Dr. Kaufman,
Your insights are both informative and instructive. I thank you for your deligence.
'making it clear that those who generate current world problems are not merely the lawless and conscience-less villains at the extremes, but rather that our problems stem with near equal abundance from dysfunction, irresponsibility and dangerous blindness in the heart of the 'mainstream.''
He is talking about SP4, 70% of United States citizens, U.S. Congress and the president of the United States.
Sounds about right.
...is cheap....
Lance, try and impress the folks above with that dissertation on how Bush broke the bank of England...we're all dying to hear.
jesus-missiles cost over $1 million each.
Very well said Dr. Kaufman. I'm just glad there are sensible people writing balanced reports... Thanks again!
Peace not war!
Salam
Mohammed
I share and congratulate Dr. Kaufmann's honest assessment about the 'slave'mentality of the free press. The malise so deep that even he does not escape the trap when he talks about the 'Islamic militants'. Wonder if the militants and extremists and terrorists need be given a religious tag. By doing so we provide them, however unknowingly a raison de etre from a religious angle. No religion in sanity supports these elements.
I am reminded of the Indonesian Muslim clergy and organisations very clearly saying that any one who takes innocent lives by shooting and throwing bombs with the allah-u-aqbar cry cannot be called a Muslim and cannot or should not be regarded as a martyr.
The religious and intellectual leadership should stand by their religious, spiritual and humanitarian values and should not get carried away by the false propaganda of the irresponsible media and stand up with clear pronouncements against such acts of violence and hatred. Religious leaders have the freedom to stand by truth, politicians and the so called free press does not have that freedom
Shrivatsa Goswami is absolutely correct call me on a term, and to urge avoiding religious attributes when describing groups who misappropriate religions to justify anti-religious behavior. There needs however to emerge a lexicon that allows writers to identify the religio-cultural identity and roots of bad actors. Greater knowledge and clarity is always preferred when seeking understanding. (Frank Kaufmann, article author)
Dr. Kauffman makes some useful points here, but I think he is aiming at the wrong target. Yes, the media he cites cite did not report this in the way he and many others would have liked.
But the media did not cause the problem! Pakistan and India have in fact been enemies since Partition in 1947, and they have fought at least three wars against each other in the intervening years. So describing these countries as rivals is not inaccurate – actually, it would be inaccurate to say anything else.
The central problem here is Islam itself.
In order to say what is true and also lay the necessary groundwork to deal with a great evil, it is necessary to understand the heart or core of that evil and declare that evil core openly.
In this situation the central problem is that Islam itself has an ineliminable and murderous evil at its heart, thus it cannot accurately be called a religion of peace or universal brotherhood or goodwill.
The evil is this: Islam from its beginnings has countenanced and used murder, bloodshed, and military operations as a way of dealing with its enemies or opponents and propagating and spreading its faith. This was done by no other than the Prophet Muhammad himself, and may his name and memory therefore be cursed.
The claim that Christianity and Islam are more-or-less equal on this issue, that Christianity has had its own lies and atrocities, carried out in its name, is only partly correct, and is false on an essential point. Yes, it is true that Christianity has had a grotesque history of lies and bloodshed and warfare done in its name and for its cause. But -- and here is the essential difference -- there is no record that Jesus ever used or advocated the use of murder, bloodshed, and military force to propagate his message and his realm; in fact, he explicitly forbade it when he told Peter to put away his sword. (Matthew 26:52). Muhammed, however, did in fact use murder, bloodshed, and military force to propagate his message and his realm.
From what little I know of Hinduism, I think it is also true that Hinduism does not have murder and bloodshed at its core.
So, to put the point bleakly and simply, but I think not over simply or inaccurately: Islam has bloodshed and murder at its core, while Christianity has love at its core, and Hinduism may too.
Thus these great religions -- Christianity and Islam, and Hinduism and Islam -- cannot be reconciled on this central point, and Islam cannot be other than a menace to the world and its people, unless Islam repents and undergoes a thorough change of heart and attitude and emphasis.
The claim that most Muslims are peaceful is true. But that claim glosses over a central point: Islam itself, at its core, is not peaceful.
From that it follows, as day follows night, that Pakistan, as a majority-Islamic state containing a large number of fundamentalist Muslims, is almost certain to harbor an evil at its core insofar as fundamentalist Islam and such Islamic groups and movements exist within it, and, furthermore, that Islamic groups from Pakistan will inevitably invade and terrorize and carry out atrocities within India. This means that Pakistani and Indian leaders will find it nearly impossible to effect any lasting or genuine peace with each other, and Islamic-led and based raids such as this one in Mumbai will inevitably lead to 'raising the prospect of a breakdown in painstaking peace talks between [these] South Asian rivals.'
I notice that I misspelled Dr. Kaufmann's name. I apologize to him for that.
Dr. Eby is right in that the media is not the root of the problem here.
I also applaud Dr. Kaufman for his spunk and desire for balance in reporting as a 'religious leader' himself.
If somehow a 'lexicon [emerges] that allows writers to identify the religio-cultural identity and roots of bad actors,' there may indeed be something to such media skewering.
The questions remain however: Will it? When? And how?
A free press (along with speech and religious expression) remain[s] the essential axis for democracy to bloom and for real and lasting peace anywhere. It seems more often than not, that those who protest or dispute that are often coming from a less than free orientation altogether and have simply gotten used to it.
The media of Pakistan, Iran, and Saudi Arabia are just a few notable areas to watch in that regard.
I misspelled his name, too.
Apologies.
page: 1
VinayakaNov 30th, 2008 - 14:02:38
Mr.Kaufmann could not have summed up the situation any better. The only way terrorism in the sub-continent can be fought is by both the countries uniting with a common purpose.The cooperation has to be based on a heart-felt need and necessity-absence of which will inevitably ruin Pakistan completely and badly wound India.
Report this comment