DR. S. AUSAF SAIED VASFI raises some pertinent questions about American policies in the backdrop of Osama’s killing.
Following the well-choreographed and successful attempt on the life of unarmed Osama bin Laden have arisen some significant questions that need to be intelligently responded by his liquidators:
Did the United States comply with the standards required in the law enforcement scenario? Did the US make enough efforts to capture Osama alive? Was this extra-judicial killing inevitable? Can Osama be passed off as a legitimate target, exempting America the burden of showing he had no intention to surrender or could not have been overpowered without being shot in the head? Was the sustained campaign against the enemy combatant a low enforcement operation against a criminal? Were the commandos under orders to shoot Osama dead? Could he not have been just incapacitated by firing on his legs as was done with the lady who tried to shield Osama by her own body? The cause of justice, feel the human rights activists, would have been served much better if he had been presented at the Hague with a comprehensive chargesheet?
HUMAN RIGHTS
In the heterogeneous Bharat even an under-trial, even a proven criminal, even a convicted murderer enjoys certain fundamental human rights. The crime of a criminal does not deprive him of this basic requirement of civilization, which touched a new low or a newer high in our plural polity on May 3 when not only some motivated TV anchors but also the Congress party snubbed its General Secretary for suffixing the name of Osama bin Laden with the Hindi word “Ji” normally used in India to show respect. When Digvijay Singh indulged in this “blasphemy”, he was in fact being sarcastic and criticising Pakistan for harbouring a terrorist. We could have philosophised rather rationalised Diggy’s ticking off by his party had it been done by Ms Uma Bharti or Mr. Nitin Gadkari. Is showing respect to the memory of a dead enemy bad manners or is it tantamount to lack of patriotism? Would it cast a shadow on our nationalism if we pray for our enemies: may Allah forgive them or may their souls rest in peace? Perhaps out of this fear, funeral prayers were not said in India except Srinagar, Chennai and Kolkata. It is sad in the context of our robust secularism.
It goes without saying that no Indian Muslim subscribed or subscribes to the views of the founder of Al-Qaeda or its affiliates. It has been officially admitted in the past. The Union Home Ministry as well as the External Affairs Ministry would do well to make it known to the world once again.
PAK IN DOCK
Following the horrendous event at Abbottabad on May 1, Pakistan found itself in the dock. Since 9/11, Islamabad has received $20 billion from America in the name of containing or eliminating terror. $3 billion has been earmarked this year alone. The lawmakers in the States insist that Pakistan should not get another cent. To quote Mr. Poe: Unless the State Department can certify to Congress that Pakistan was not harbouring America’s No. 1 enemy, Pakistan should not receive 1 more cent of American aid.”
What in its defence Islamabad has said is total trash. And does not behove a truly Muslim State. But Washington has assured continuance of aid to Pakistan.
One wonders at the depth of shallowness of the recipient of this dole. It runs into the very face of self-esteem and self-respect. It amounts to mortgaging the national sovereignty. And if Pakistan continues to receive it, it should remain prepared for the periodic drubbings coupled with humiliations. This so-called aid fetters Pakistan’s conscience and policymaking. Like a self-assured nation, Pakistan should think in terms of gratefully returning the entire dole with thanks and follow its independent and sovereign policy. It is more in consonance with Islam, which it claims it follows.
On the very morrow of the assault of the Garrison Town, a section of Indian print and electronic media started applying sustained pressure on the Government to do what Washington had done. The 2-line caption of the Asian Age editorial (May 3) was: Time for India to flex Some Muscle. Some TV channels started demanding handing over of people like Dawood Ibrahim, Hafiz Sayeed and Azhar Masood, etc. Mr. Maroof Reza, head of the Security Watch, India lamented: “We have failed to use force to punish enemies.”
As in the past, the sober and soft-spoken Prime Minister refused to be provoked and counselled patience. Earlier, however there took place a slanging match between Indo-Pak veterans. The Indian Army Chief, Gen. V.K. Singh said: Our army, air force and navy are fully prepared to face any untoward situation. In reply Pakistan Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir thundered: “The Pakistan Security forces are neither incompetent nor negligent about their sacred duty to protect Pakistan. There shall not be any doubt that any repetition of such an act will have disastrous consequences.”
US PRODUCT
Now everybody is curious to know about Osama bin Laden. In brief he was a product of the United States imperialist and expansionist foreign policy. He was used to the hilt by Washington which ensnared the young Saudi into thinking that committed Muslims like him can drive the perfidious Soviet Union out of the otherwise Muslim Afghanistan. It dates back to 1979-89. The United States loosened its purse-strings in addition to training Obama’s admirers drawn from the Arab Islamic countries who were trained in warfare by American personnel. Afghan and Pakistani leaders and sub-leaders were financed who took the money as a patronage in a sacred cause.
What Osama and his foot-soldiers forgot was that in Islam, besides the objectives, the means to achieve those objectives have also to be pristine pure. No well-read and level-headed Muslim can ever think of setting up an Islamic dispensation with the help of tainted money or money supplied motivatedly by any third party, having its own agenda and ulterior motives.
SEEDS OF ANIMOSITY
After the unceremonial and ultimate departure of Soviet Union from Afghanistan, the United States realised the implications of an Islamic Afghanistan in addition to Islamic Pakistan. It is here that the seeds of animosity and distrust were sown between Osama and the United States.
The relevant question is: what transformed a simple Osama into a terrorist Osama? Two factors: hypocrisy of the United States while dealing with the Arab Muslim problems and obduracy of the Arab Muslim world in their refusal to pursue Islam in all walks of life.
FACTORS
The most significant factor behind Osama’s popularity in the Arab Muslim world was not his scholarship or statesmanship. His forte was: here is a person who has the cheek and temerity to stand up against a world power, armed to the hilt. He was a potent symbol of resistance to his admirers. What added to his charisma was his spotless character and perseverance. It was his firm determination that endeared him. So, partially was the case with Saddam Hussein.
The questionable attitude of the Arab countries added fuel to Osama’s fire. Even after his assassination he was denied burial in his homeland.
At the heels of this comes planned maligning of Islam and patronising those who tar the image of the ideology. Osama could not digest this besides the dilapidation of Iraq and destruction of Afghanistan.
Now the United States is rather vigorously after the atomic power of Pakistan. Add to it Iran’s nuclear reactors also. Without sufficient logic these two Muslim States are considered important in the Arab Islamic world for having nuclear power in their arsenal.
SUICIDE IN INSTALMENTS
We feel the doctrine of Pax-Americana, coupled with American nationalism, tempered with its dubious aspiration for global hegemonism has blinded its think-tanks to certain fundamental postulates and values of civilized life. The US war on terror has claimed more innocent lives than those claimed by Osama and his followers. In Iraq the US liquidated more than 600,000 people. How does Washington legitimise this barbarity? How does it justify the cruellest torture including water-boarding of the suspects of Twin Tower tragedy? The world at large failed to understand why the Taliban offer of handing over Osama for trial in Pakistan was rejected by the United States in 2007.
Killings do not solve conflicts. The law does. How is it that the US never cares to find out why a bigger chunk of mankind loathes it? Target killings do not solve problems as we see in the case of Israel while enacting Sabra and Chhatilla. The US kills its ardent but honest dissenters and never cares to know the cause of their grievance. Is the fear culture that has been generated by the United States not self-defeating? The US appears to have undermined its egalitarian values. It is committing suicide in instalments.