[MGG] The National Front is confused
THE PEOPLE IN POWER are confused.
They have not realised the people challenge them at every turn. The post-information age, which is now, is as destructive to the people in power as the Industrial Age was when it began in 1832. That enabled the rulers to ride rough shod over the people, who found their unique ways to confront that. What happens in society now was what happened before the Industrial Age. But the people will not succeed unless by intellectuals.
In Malaysia, the National Front is still in power, since it attained power in 1955, but is worried at this development. The King, who had agreed to officiate a gathering, was told by officials in the Prime Minister's Department not to attend. It got intellectuals at the hall angry. The National Front showed weakness which it could not control.
This meeting was organised by dissident UMNO members, and attended by all Malays, intellectuals, from PAS and Parti Keadilan Rakyat, and who used to be senior figures in the ancien regime. It was better organised to challenge than the reformasi movement of former deputy prime minister, Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim. The reformasi movement failed because though it was a ground revolt most of the intellectuals stayed away. Even then it caused fright in the National Front.
The intellectuals in the National Front realised what could happen if it had succeeded, and fear is the result. The National Front changed its policies, trying to solve some of the issues the reformasi movement reformed. But the reformasi movement has fallen into the doldrums after Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim was released from prison. Now by and large it second guesses what the reformasi movement had in mind and looks over its shoulders at what the reformasi movement is doing. But the reformasi movement lit a light for others to follow.
The National Front is therefore paranoid at any talk of rebellion. The opposition is weak, and the National Front can blow rings around it, in parliament, state assemblies and out. That used to suffice in the past. Not now. The people have got brave and demand answers at unusual times.
They question government agencies for the ills they do. The government tells lies, and the truth comes out in commissions on inquiries, and under oath. Malaysians are now told that the Home minister, Dato' Azmi Khalid, when to Being this month to apologise to the Chinese government for the police illtreating a Malay. Predictably, he said two weeks later he did not go to apologise and that the visit was planned much earlier! But the Malaysian media had reports, several from Beijing, he did just that. He has been telling untruths ever since. In the past he might have succeeded. Those in power believed, rightly, that people have short memories, and only what is said now is believed. But the people are being energised.
The more perceptive among National Front, and UMNO, leaders realise this. But the political decision is to ramrod its way so that the people are frightened. But the people are less frightened now. Telling the King not to attend the forum was a sign of weakness. It does not know that after 50 years in power more people, including the intellectuals in the National Front, are against it. Ironically, the rulers are now with the people.
The people will not rebel unless they have to. The people of England did not like what they had to pay and do in the 13th century until a lord, Simon de Montfort, rallied them to his side and made King John sign the Magna Carta. Napolean had he not the people on his side when he became Emperor of France. King Louis XVI and Queen Antoinette would not have been executed in France if not the nobles and others got the people on their side.
The US independence would not have been possible if the people, already suffering from the exactions of the British, rallied to the side of the intellectuals and lanlords. The poor has not succeeded, if they are not led by intellectuals. Castro remains in power since 1959 because he kept the people on his side. India would have not got its independence had not the people joined the intellectuals and the rich. Pandit Jawarharlah Nehru, Mohandas Karam Chand Gandhi, Subhas Chandra Bose were intellectuals and landlords. Mangal Pandey fired the first shot, as the new film shows, but Indian independence did not come until a century later, and after the people had been led these intellectuals and landlords.
The rebels against British rule in Malaya came from the titled: Dato' Bahaman, Mat Kilau, Maharaja Lela, Dato' Sagor were on the royal court. They failed because they could not get the people on their side in fighting the British, who hanged most of them. Our officials did not bother until Mat Kilau was found to be alive. There were intense discussions in the 20th century whether he ought to be given a dato'ship. I knew his son-in-law and daughter, and have stayed with them when I was in the capital he was Malaysian ambassador. He later became an official at the Organisation of Islamic Conference when Tengku Abul Rahman, Malaysia's first prime minister, was secretary- general. But until Mat Kilau was found alive, the Malaysian people, if ever, did not know the connection. Both are dead now, his widow died in a car crash. The people will not move unless led.
UMNO was founded in the Istana in Johore Bahru, Dato' Sir Onn bin Jaffar its founding president, was a cousin of the sultan, and mentri besar of Johore. (His mother's sister, both Circassions from Turkey, was the wife of Sultan Abubakar, grandfather of the present Sultan.) Many of the earlier leaders of UMNO were from the palace.
It is only the last two presidents, Tun Mahathir Mohamed and Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, were not from the aristocratic class, although Tun Mahathir's mother was from the Kedah royal court.
UMNO today rewrites history, by insisting it was formed by the people, that the rulers were not involved. This is pure spin. There would not have been UMNO, which was formed in 1946 to protest against the Malayan Union proposals reducing the sultans to mere digits, and later on were given independence by the British.
Its first prime was Tengku Abdul Rahman, a scion of the Royal House of Kedah. It is a sign of the times that Dato' Seri Najib Tun Razak, who held the hereditary title of Dato' Shahbandar Pahang after his father died in 1976, clings to "Dato' Seri", latter day invention given or bought by people who think they are noble.
They were cabinet ministers in the past who were holders of the hereditary titles of the Sultans they were loyal to. Without the rulers, there would be no UMNO, which insists they are an irrelevant appendage. But the Sultan of Johore, when Yang di Pertuan Agung, went to the pulpit at the National Mosque unannounced, told a brief history of how UMNO was founded in his palace, and ordered the then Prime Minister, Dato' Seri (now Tun) Mahathir Mohamed, to shake hands and 'minta maaf' and let bygones be bygones with his then deputy, Dato' (now Tan Sri) Musa Hitam. They were not on speaking terms then, but they did.
The present day UMNO, with its self-proclaimed peoples' roots, finds its policies affecting the people to its disadvantage. It is fearful that some of their intellectuals or leaders will desert it and join them. Tun Mahathir Mohamed is against the UMNO leadership. But he might now. He represents the old turks in UMNO. Pak Lah represents the young turks mainly because he relies on his son-in-law, Khairy Jamaluddin, and others in their 30s who had graduated from Oxford and Cambridge. Pak Lah is afraid that that opposed to his advisers might join the old turks, even those who were in England at the same time.
The opposition in UMNO now have both leaders and a platform, and would get the support of the people if the young turks in Pak Lah's camp insist on browbeating those who disagree, rather than talk to them. What is happening now was spelt out in "The Animal Farm" nearly 60 years ago!
M.G.G. Pillai
Sunday, March 12, 2006
Islamic converts ‘threaten Manila curbs on terror’
The Financial Times, London
20 December 2005
Islamic converts ‘threaten Manila curbs on terror’
By Roel Landingin in Manila
Published: December 20 2005 17:40
A small but well connected group of militant Islamic converts could spoil the Philippine government’s efforts to curb terrorism and to conclude a peace deal with Muslim separatists in the southern Philippines, an influential think-tank has warned.
The International Crisis Group also urged Manila to improve its tactics and avoid sacrificing human rights to what it called “careless counter-terror measures” that generated more sympathy and recruits forthe extremists’ cause.
In a report released on Tuesday, the ICG pointed the finger at theRajah Solaiman Movement, a group of Muslim converts suspected of jihadist tendencies and named after a 16th-century sultan who resisted Spanish incursions in Manila. ICG expected the group to play an increasingly important role in relationships among terror groups in the Philippines.
The biggest Muslim rebel group, the 12,000-strong Moro Islamic Liberation Front (Milf), is preparing for a political settlement with Manila in the southern island of Mindanao, and is distancing itself from the south-east Asian terrorist network, Jemaah Islamiah. This is pushing Islamic extremists closer to the more violent Abu Sayyaf groupand increasing the risk of a split within Milf itself.
The ICG said: “The Abu Sayyaf group and Jemaah Islamiah are working increasingly with the Rajah Solaiman Movement of militant converts toIslam based in Manila and northern Luzon, who are a vehicle for more experienced terrorist groups to move into the country’s urban heartland.”Militant Islamic converts are suspected of staging two of the recent terrorist attacks in the Philippines – the Valentine’s Day bombing of a bus in the financial district of Makati that killed four people and the February 2004 explosion that burned and sank a 10,000-tonne ferry, killing 116.
Islamic converts, who were estimated to number about 95,000 in 1995 by Philippine scholars, now numbered 200,000, said the ICG, helping make Islam the fastest growing religion in the Philippines, the only predominantly Christian nation in Asia.
ICG said many of the converts were Filipino workers returning from Saudi Arabia and the Gulf. Philippine security officials rejected the report’s characterisation of the government’s counter-terror measures as “careless”, saying Manila adhered to human rights and due process in the fight against terrorists.
Ricardo Blancaflor, executive director of the anti-terrorism taskforce, said the government had secured convictions against 27 terror suspects in the past year.
20 December 2005
Islamic converts ‘threaten Manila curbs on terror’
By Roel Landingin in Manila
Published: December 20 2005 17:40
A small but well connected group of militant Islamic converts could spoil the Philippine government’s efforts to curb terrorism and to conclude a peace deal with Muslim separatists in the southern Philippines, an influential think-tank has warned.
The International Crisis Group also urged Manila to improve its tactics and avoid sacrificing human rights to what it called “careless counter-terror measures” that generated more sympathy and recruits forthe extremists’ cause.
In a report released on Tuesday, the ICG pointed the finger at theRajah Solaiman Movement, a group of Muslim converts suspected of jihadist tendencies and named after a 16th-century sultan who resisted Spanish incursions in Manila. ICG expected the group to play an increasingly important role in relationships among terror groups in the Philippines.
The biggest Muslim rebel group, the 12,000-strong Moro Islamic Liberation Front (Milf), is preparing for a political settlement with Manila in the southern island of Mindanao, and is distancing itself from the south-east Asian terrorist network, Jemaah Islamiah. This is pushing Islamic extremists closer to the more violent Abu Sayyaf groupand increasing the risk of a split within Milf itself.
The ICG said: “The Abu Sayyaf group and Jemaah Islamiah are working increasingly with the Rajah Solaiman Movement of militant converts toIslam based in Manila and northern Luzon, who are a vehicle for more experienced terrorist groups to move into the country’s urban heartland.”Militant Islamic converts are suspected of staging two of the recent terrorist attacks in the Philippines – the Valentine’s Day bombing of a bus in the financial district of Makati that killed four people and the February 2004 explosion that burned and sank a 10,000-tonne ferry, killing 116.
Islamic converts, who were estimated to number about 95,000 in 1995 by Philippine scholars, now numbered 200,000, said the ICG, helping make Islam the fastest growing religion in the Philippines, the only predominantly Christian nation in Asia.
ICG said many of the converts were Filipino workers returning from Saudi Arabia and the Gulf. Philippine security officials rejected the report’s characterisation of the government’s counter-terror measures as “careless”, saying Manila adhered to human rights and due process in the fight against terrorists.
Ricardo Blancaflor, executive director of the anti-terrorism taskforce, said the government had secured convictions against 27 terror suspects in the past year.
Noh rapped for claiming ignorance
The Malay Mail, Kuala Lumpur
20 December 2005
Noh rapped for claiming ignorance
RIZALMAN HAMMIM
KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 20 Seputeh MP Teresa Kok voiced doubts over Deputy Internal Security Minister Datuk Noh Omar's statement that he did not know the identity of the woman inthe video clip being forced to strip and squat.
"Since the police arranged for the woman in the clip to give her testimonyto the independent inquiry, they must have known her identity. So, why wasn't the identity of the woman included in the report to Parliament and why didn't Noh know about it?" asked Kok at a Press conference yesterday.
On Sunday, Noh said he never knew the identity or nationality of the woman in the clip, even when the matter was debated in Parliament.
He also said that nothing was said about the identity of the women in the report that he was to table in Parliament as the police were still investigating the case. Kok also took to task the police for delaying the investigation of the matter.
"The police said they knew about the clip since the end of June. Why didn'tthe police act on the matter until I showed the clip in Parliament? What would have happened if the clip was not exposed?" asked Kok.
A group of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and political parties have called on the police to halt the practice of 'strip-and-squat' on detainees."The practice is in violation of human rights and should be stopped."
The police should protect the dignity of the detainees irrespective oftheir race or nationality," said Kok. Among the NGOs and political parties that made the call are the DAP, PartiKeadilan Nasional, Parti Islam SeMalaysia, Jamaah Islah Malaysia, the Women's Development Collective (WDC), All Women's Action Society (Awam) and the Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall. Their representatives were present at the Press conference yesterday.
Awam also called on the authorities to come up with a guideline on bodysearch by the police."We understand that body search needs to be done in certain cases but aslong as there is no guideline on the matter, abuses will continue," said Awam's media co-ordinator Yasmin Masidi.
20 December 2005
Noh rapped for claiming ignorance
RIZALMAN HAMMIM
KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 20 Seputeh MP Teresa Kok voiced doubts over Deputy Internal Security Minister Datuk Noh Omar's statement that he did not know the identity of the woman inthe video clip being forced to strip and squat.
"Since the police arranged for the woman in the clip to give her testimonyto the independent inquiry, they must have known her identity. So, why wasn't the identity of the woman included in the report to Parliament and why didn't Noh know about it?" asked Kok at a Press conference yesterday.
On Sunday, Noh said he never knew the identity or nationality of the woman in the clip, even when the matter was debated in Parliament.
He also said that nothing was said about the identity of the women in the report that he was to table in Parliament as the police were still investigating the case. Kok also took to task the police for delaying the investigation of the matter.
"The police said they knew about the clip since the end of June. Why didn'tthe police act on the matter until I showed the clip in Parliament? What would have happened if the clip was not exposed?" asked Kok.
A group of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and political parties have called on the police to halt the practice of 'strip-and-squat' on detainees."The practice is in violation of human rights and should be stopped."
The police should protect the dignity of the detainees irrespective oftheir race or nationality," said Kok. Among the NGOs and political parties that made the call are the DAP, PartiKeadilan Nasional, Parti Islam SeMalaysia, Jamaah Islah Malaysia, the Women's Development Collective (WDC), All Women's Action Society (Awam) and the Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall. Their representatives were present at the Press conference yesterday.
Awam also called on the authorities to come up with a guideline on bodysearch by the police."We understand that body search needs to be done in certain cases but aslong as there is no guideline on the matter, abuses will continue," said Awam's media co-ordinator Yasmin Masidi.
Oxford: the fatal choice
The Times, LondonOpinion - William Rees-Mogg
December 19, 2005
Oxford: the fatal choice
The best undergraduate teaching in the world is in peril if colleges cannot select their students
SIR TIM LANKESTER has had a distinguished career. He has been President of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, since 2001. In the late 1960s he was an economist at the World Bank in Washington; he joined the Civil Service and became Private Secretary to two successive Prime Ministers, Jim Callaghan in 1978-79 and Margaret Thatcher from 1979-81. He rose to be the Permanent Secretary in the Department for Education from 1994-95.
There are positives and negatives in such a career. No one is given these promotions who does not possess high ability. His experience in public administration is wide. His years in Downing Street will have given him a view from the top down as well as from the base up. His work at the World Bank and as a Treasury official means that he must be highly numerate.
The negatives can be summed up in the anxiety that he may well have acquired the professional deformations both of the civil servant and the economist; it is usually the case that long-term civil servants absorb the ethos of their service, just as politicians become politicians, lawyers become lawyers, and journalists become journalists. Professional administrators have a preference for convenient administrative solutions. They tend also to have undue respect for central authority. They are seldom the last-ditch warriors for liberty.
Oxford University has been under pressure from the Government on the subject of admissions. This began five years ago when Gordon Brown, who is more than a bit of a bully, took up the case of Laura Spence, a gifted student from a Northern comprehensive who failed to get a place in her subject at Magdalen College.
In fact, Magdalen’s procedures turned out to be completely fair. Without pausing to establish the facts, Mr Brown let rip with his prejudices and demanded reform of Oxford’s admission system. He is accustomed to exercising power and accustomed to being obeyed.
This was backed up last September by a White Paper on university admissions that demanded “fair access”. There is no evidence that comprehensive school pupils have been given anything less than fair access by the Oxford colleges when deciding on admissions. Indeed, there have been many complaints of discrimination against candidates from independent schools because of the educational advantages they have enjoyed. Admissions tutors are more than sympathetic to candidates from those state schools that send few pupils to Oxford.
A real difficulty arises from the poor standards of many comprehensive schools, which do not give an academic education remotely comparable with that of today’s independent schools or the old grammar schools. Public school pupils enjoy a greater advantage than they did 60 years ago, when I went up to Oxford. That is because Labour chose to destroy the grammar schools.
Tony Blair, against the will of his party, is now trying to put that right by establishing independent, non-fee paying, trust schools that John Prescott regards as grammar schools under another name. I only hope he is right.
As educational administrators tend to do, Oxford University decided to deal with this problem by setting up a working party. It asked Sir Tim Lankester to take the chair. I suppose that was a reasonable idea. He has the experience. There is always a chance that Sir Humphrey will be the best choice to outwit another Sir Humphrey.
The result was exactly what a pessimist might have feared. The working party produced a staff college solution. It decided to centralise admissions. If these recommendations go through — and there will need to be a university vote — the colleges will lose the right to select their own undergraduates. Every candidate would be considered by members of the faculty in which he or she wished to study, and would be selected by the university, not by the colleges. The colleges would get the students that they were given, perhaps with some allowance for student choice.
There are serious disadvantages in this. Educational institutions maintain their standards by control of admissions. At the secondary level, the 58 Labour MPs who have sponsored the anti-Blair alternative White Paper are determined that trust schools should not choose their own students. They want the organs of the State to do that. They do not want these schools to become centres of excellence.
At the university level, Gordon Brown and the White Paper on admissions want the State to be the ultimate authority. They do not think that the colleges can be trusted to do what they are told; they believe that the university can be bullied.
Oxford is a collegiate university, with individual undergraduate teaching by the tutorial method. This has been a great international success in the postwar period. Few people would place Oxford in the top ten of world universities in postgraduate teaching and research. Even in the United Kingdom, Imperial College is probably better and so is Cambridge. Yet postgraduate work is largely the business of the university. Oxford probably is the best university in the world at teaching undergraduates and that is done by the colleges. Go to Oxford from 18 to 22 and then go on to Harvard for a doctorate is probably the best advice one could give a really ambitious student.
Small is beautiful; in terms of personal decisions, it is often wisest. When I was given a place at Balliol I was interviewed by the Master, by a young don who became the next Master but two, and by another young don, who became the president of Tony Blair’s college, St John’s. That was due care and attention. If Sir Tim gets his way thousands of candidates will be processed in an efficient mass production scheme by dons who will not teach them and may never see them again. The college tutorial system, and the independence of Oxford, would be fatally undermined.
Copyright 2005 Times Newspapers Ltd.
December 19, 2005
Oxford: the fatal choice
The best undergraduate teaching in the world is in peril if colleges cannot select their students
SIR TIM LANKESTER has had a distinguished career. He has been President of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, since 2001. In the late 1960s he was an economist at the World Bank in Washington; he joined the Civil Service and became Private Secretary to two successive Prime Ministers, Jim Callaghan in 1978-79 and Margaret Thatcher from 1979-81. He rose to be the Permanent Secretary in the Department for Education from 1994-95.
There are positives and negatives in such a career. No one is given these promotions who does not possess high ability. His experience in public administration is wide. His years in Downing Street will have given him a view from the top down as well as from the base up. His work at the World Bank and as a Treasury official means that he must be highly numerate.
The negatives can be summed up in the anxiety that he may well have acquired the professional deformations both of the civil servant and the economist; it is usually the case that long-term civil servants absorb the ethos of their service, just as politicians become politicians, lawyers become lawyers, and journalists become journalists. Professional administrators have a preference for convenient administrative solutions. They tend also to have undue respect for central authority. They are seldom the last-ditch warriors for liberty.
Oxford University has been under pressure from the Government on the subject of admissions. This began five years ago when Gordon Brown, who is more than a bit of a bully, took up the case of Laura Spence, a gifted student from a Northern comprehensive who failed to get a place in her subject at Magdalen College.
In fact, Magdalen’s procedures turned out to be completely fair. Without pausing to establish the facts, Mr Brown let rip with his prejudices and demanded reform of Oxford’s admission system. He is accustomed to exercising power and accustomed to being obeyed.
This was backed up last September by a White Paper on university admissions that demanded “fair access”. There is no evidence that comprehensive school pupils have been given anything less than fair access by the Oxford colleges when deciding on admissions. Indeed, there have been many complaints of discrimination against candidates from independent schools because of the educational advantages they have enjoyed. Admissions tutors are more than sympathetic to candidates from those state schools that send few pupils to Oxford.
A real difficulty arises from the poor standards of many comprehensive schools, which do not give an academic education remotely comparable with that of today’s independent schools or the old grammar schools. Public school pupils enjoy a greater advantage than they did 60 years ago, when I went up to Oxford. That is because Labour chose to destroy the grammar schools.
Tony Blair, against the will of his party, is now trying to put that right by establishing independent, non-fee paying, trust schools that John Prescott regards as grammar schools under another name. I only hope he is right.
As educational administrators tend to do, Oxford University decided to deal with this problem by setting up a working party. It asked Sir Tim Lankester to take the chair. I suppose that was a reasonable idea. He has the experience. There is always a chance that Sir Humphrey will be the best choice to outwit another Sir Humphrey.
The result was exactly what a pessimist might have feared. The working party produced a staff college solution. It decided to centralise admissions. If these recommendations go through — and there will need to be a university vote — the colleges will lose the right to select their own undergraduates. Every candidate would be considered by members of the faculty in which he or she wished to study, and would be selected by the university, not by the colleges. The colleges would get the students that they were given, perhaps with some allowance for student choice.
There are serious disadvantages in this. Educational institutions maintain their standards by control of admissions. At the secondary level, the 58 Labour MPs who have sponsored the anti-Blair alternative White Paper are determined that trust schools should not choose their own students. They want the organs of the State to do that. They do not want these schools to become centres of excellence.
At the university level, Gordon Brown and the White Paper on admissions want the State to be the ultimate authority. They do not think that the colleges can be trusted to do what they are told; they believe that the university can be bullied.
Oxford is a collegiate university, with individual undergraduate teaching by the tutorial method. This has been a great international success in the postwar period. Few people would place Oxford in the top ten of world universities in postgraduate teaching and research. Even in the United Kingdom, Imperial College is probably better and so is Cambridge. Yet postgraduate work is largely the business of the university. Oxford probably is the best university in the world at teaching undergraduates and that is done by the colleges. Go to Oxford from 18 to 22 and then go on to Harvard for a doctorate is probably the best advice one could give a really ambitious student.
Small is beautiful; in terms of personal decisions, it is often wisest. When I was given a place at Balliol I was interviewed by the Master, by a young don who became the next Master but two, and by another young don, who became the president of Tony Blair’s college, St John’s. That was due care and attention. If Sir Tim gets his way thousands of candidates will be processed in an efficient mass production scheme by dons who will not teach them and may never see them again. The college tutorial system, and the independence of Oxford, would be fatally undermined.
Copyright 2005 Times Newspapers Ltd.
Abdul Rauf Singkel
Akhbar Mingguan Malaysia pada hari Ahad, 16 Januari 2004 ada menyiarkan tentang berita makam ulamak besar Aceh, Syeikh Abdul Rauf Singkel yang rosak teruk dilanda tsunami.
Menurut ceritanya, suatu pesta hiburan telah diadakan di persisiran pantai berhampiran makam tersebut pada 25 Disember lalu, walaupun telah ditegur oleh seorang kiyai. Sama ada ianya satu kebetulan atau tidak, keesokan harinya tsunami melanda dan memusnahkan dua kampung yang ada di situ iaitu Kampung *Syiah Kuala dan Kampung Alun Naga.
Siapakah Abdul Rauf Singkel dan apakah signifikannya kehadiran beliau di dalam sejarah Acheh?
KELAHIRAN
Beliau adalah tokoh ulamak tersohor Nusantara pada kurun ke-17. Syeikh Abdul Rauf dilahirkan di Kabupaten Singkel, sebuah daerah kecil di Aceh Selatan pada tahun 1620, iaitu lebih 100 tahun selepas kejatuhan Melaka di tangan Portugis.
PENDIDIKAN
Pendidikan pertamanya adalah dari ayahnya, Syeikh Ali, seorang alim yang juga mempunyai pesantren. Beliau kemudian berguru di Fansur, Acheh. Beberapa tahun kemudian, beliau berguru dengan seorang tokoh ulamak Acheh iaitu Syeikh Shamsuddin Al Sumatrani di Banda Aceh.
Beliau merantau ke Tanah Arab pada tahun 1642 dan belajar dari 19 guru dan 27 ulamak di dalam berbagai disiplin Ilmu Islam. Tempat belajarnya adalah di sepanjang perjalanan untuk mengerjakan haji, mulai dari Doha, Yaman, Jeddah, Makkah serta Madinah. Tahap intelektualisme beliau adalah sangat tinggi berkat didikan para ulama terkemuka saat itu.
Pengetahuannya sangat lengkap mencakupi pelbagai bidang; syariat, fiqh, hadis, ilmu kalam dan tasawuf.
MENGAJAR
Kemudian beliau mengajar di Mekah & Madinah. Selepas 19 tahun berada di Tanah Arab, beliau memutuskan kembali ke Aceh sekitar tahun 1662 dan mengajar di madrasahnya di Kuala Sg Aceh. Ramai murid datang berguru dengannya dari seluruh Nusantara. Antara murid-muridnya yang menjadi ulama terkenal ialah Syeikh Burhanuddin Wafan dari Minangkabau, Abd Al Muhnyi dari Jawa Barat, Dawud Al Jawi Al Fansuri dan Ismail Agha Mushthafa Agha 'Ali Al Rumi dari Turki.
BIDANG PENTADBIRAN
Kerana pengetahuannya yang luas, Sultanah Safiyatuddin Tajul Alam (1645 hingga 1675) telah melantik beliau menjadi Perdana Menteri yg bertanggung jawab memberi nasihat di dalam bidang agama, sosial, kebudayaan dan pentadbiran. Beliau bertanggung jawab di dalam penyusunan semula pentadbiran Acheh yang hancur akibat perang dengan Portugis di Melaka (1629). Hasilnya Acheh pulih semula sebagai pusat Islam & kebudayaan Melayu di Nusantara.
BIDANG KEAGAMAAN
Beliau merupakan tokoh kesufian, ahli hukum Islam & pendakwah ulung di Nusantara.
· Hukum Islam - jasa beliau yang paling besar ialah meletakkan Syari'at Islam sebagai perundangan negara. Fatwa & karangan beliau diterima ramai kerana ianya jelas & mudah difahami.
· Tafsir Al Qur'an - orang pertama menterjemahkan Al-Qur'an ke dalam Bahasa Melayu di Nusantara. Buku tafsirnya Al Baidhawi masih diterbitkan di Mesir hingga ke hari ini.
· Dakwah - menyebarkan Islam dengan mendirikan madrasah, mengajar & menulis tentang Islam.
MENINGGAL DUNIA
Beliau meninggal dunia ketika berusia 73 tahun. Beliau juga digelar "Tengku *Syiah Kuala". Sebagai mengenang jasa & menghormati peribadi beliau, sebuah universiti di Banda Aceh telah dinamakan sempena nama beliau iaitu Universiti *Syiah Kuala www.unsyiah.ac.id/.
Nota - "Syiah" (disebut "Syah") adalah "Syeikh" di dalam loghat Acheh. Ia tiada kaitan langsung dengan fahaman Syi'ah.
Menurut ceritanya, suatu pesta hiburan telah diadakan di persisiran pantai berhampiran makam tersebut pada 25 Disember lalu, walaupun telah ditegur oleh seorang kiyai. Sama ada ianya satu kebetulan atau tidak, keesokan harinya tsunami melanda dan memusnahkan dua kampung yang ada di situ iaitu Kampung *Syiah Kuala dan Kampung Alun Naga.
Siapakah Abdul Rauf Singkel dan apakah signifikannya kehadiran beliau di dalam sejarah Acheh?
KELAHIRAN
Beliau adalah tokoh ulamak tersohor Nusantara pada kurun ke-17. Syeikh Abdul Rauf dilahirkan di Kabupaten Singkel, sebuah daerah kecil di Aceh Selatan pada tahun 1620, iaitu lebih 100 tahun selepas kejatuhan Melaka di tangan Portugis.
PENDIDIKAN
Pendidikan pertamanya adalah dari ayahnya, Syeikh Ali, seorang alim yang juga mempunyai pesantren. Beliau kemudian berguru di Fansur, Acheh. Beberapa tahun kemudian, beliau berguru dengan seorang tokoh ulamak Acheh iaitu Syeikh Shamsuddin Al Sumatrani di Banda Aceh.
Beliau merantau ke Tanah Arab pada tahun 1642 dan belajar dari 19 guru dan 27 ulamak di dalam berbagai disiplin Ilmu Islam. Tempat belajarnya adalah di sepanjang perjalanan untuk mengerjakan haji, mulai dari Doha, Yaman, Jeddah, Makkah serta Madinah. Tahap intelektualisme beliau adalah sangat tinggi berkat didikan para ulama terkemuka saat itu.
Pengetahuannya sangat lengkap mencakupi pelbagai bidang; syariat, fiqh, hadis, ilmu kalam dan tasawuf.
MENGAJAR
Kemudian beliau mengajar di Mekah & Madinah. Selepas 19 tahun berada di Tanah Arab, beliau memutuskan kembali ke Aceh sekitar tahun 1662 dan mengajar di madrasahnya di Kuala Sg Aceh. Ramai murid datang berguru dengannya dari seluruh Nusantara. Antara murid-muridnya yang menjadi ulama terkenal ialah Syeikh Burhanuddin Wafan dari Minangkabau, Abd Al Muhnyi dari Jawa Barat, Dawud Al Jawi Al Fansuri dan Ismail Agha Mushthafa Agha 'Ali Al Rumi dari Turki.
BIDANG PENTADBIRAN
Kerana pengetahuannya yang luas, Sultanah Safiyatuddin Tajul Alam (1645 hingga 1675) telah melantik beliau menjadi Perdana Menteri yg bertanggung jawab memberi nasihat di dalam bidang agama, sosial, kebudayaan dan pentadbiran. Beliau bertanggung jawab di dalam penyusunan semula pentadbiran Acheh yang hancur akibat perang dengan Portugis di Melaka (1629). Hasilnya Acheh pulih semula sebagai pusat Islam & kebudayaan Melayu di Nusantara.
BIDANG KEAGAMAAN
Beliau merupakan tokoh kesufian, ahli hukum Islam & pendakwah ulung di Nusantara.
· Hukum Islam - jasa beliau yang paling besar ialah meletakkan Syari'at Islam sebagai perundangan negara. Fatwa & karangan beliau diterima ramai kerana ianya jelas & mudah difahami.
· Tafsir Al Qur'an - orang pertama menterjemahkan Al-Qur'an ke dalam Bahasa Melayu di Nusantara. Buku tafsirnya Al Baidhawi masih diterbitkan di Mesir hingga ke hari ini.
· Dakwah - menyebarkan Islam dengan mendirikan madrasah, mengajar & menulis tentang Islam.
MENINGGAL DUNIA
Beliau meninggal dunia ketika berusia 73 tahun. Beliau juga digelar "Tengku *Syiah Kuala". Sebagai mengenang jasa & menghormati peribadi beliau, sebuah universiti di Banda Aceh telah dinamakan sempena nama beliau iaitu Universiti *Syiah Kuala www.unsyiah.ac.id/.
Nota - "Syiah" (disebut "Syah") adalah "Syeikh" di dalam loghat Acheh. Ia tiada kaitan langsung dengan fahaman Syi'ah.
Petronas profits create friction
Asia Times Online
10 March 2006
Southeast Asia
Petronas profits create friction
By Anil Netto
PENANG, Malaysia - Petronas, Malaysia's national petroleum
corporation, like many other multinational energy companies, is
riding the crest of soaring global fuel prices and raking in record
revenues and profits. However, those globally pumped-up profits are
causing a stir on the Malaysian street, with protesters calling the
company's historically opaque finances into question.
For the fiscal year ending in March 2005, the state-run corporation
recorded a pre-tax profit of US$15 billion, up 55% from the previous
year, contributing 30% of the Malaysian government's total revenues.
This year's profits are tipped to climb even higher on the back of
spiraling global oil prices, potentially representing the best
financial results in Petronas' 32-year corporate history.
But those gains are not coming without controversy. Last week the
Malaysian government reduced fuel subsidies and allowed the local
price of gasoline, diesel and liquefied petroleum gas to float,
leading to a rise of 18% to 23% depending on the fuel source. The
policy move was the latest in a series of incremental and unpopular
price hikes over the past two years. More recently, rising domestic
prices have renewed national arguments for more interventionist and
less neo-liberal economic policy prescriptions.
Malaysia famously bucked conventional economic wisdom when it applied
capital controls in the wake of the 1997-98 Asian financial crisis -
a move that in effect insulated the Malaysian economy from the
ravages sharp currency depreciations wrought on Thailand and
Indonesia. Now, in the era of spiraling global fuel prices, many in
Malaysia believe that, as a net fuel exporter, fuel subsidies could
provide the country's export-dependent economy a competitive boost
and insulate the domestic economy from inflationary pressures.
That argument is finding popular expression through a string of
street demonstrations and protests that have put Prime Minister
Abdullah Badawi's government on the defensive. The government says
the price hikes are necessary to curb over-consumption, to discourage
smuggling and to remove subsidy-generated market distortions. The
government also argues that Malaysia's fuel prices are still among
the lowest in Southeast Asia, apart from oil-rich Brunei.
Public anger has perhaps predictably focused on Petronas' big bottom
line and, perhaps more important, on how those massive profits are
used and potentially abused. The company's critics have long
complained that elected politicians, rather than pumping petro-
profits back into sustainable economic activities, often dipped into
Petronas' reserves to finance economically unsustainable ventures or
to bail out politically connected firms with funds that could have
been better used for national development. No Malaysian minister or
senior politician has ever been held to account for misallocating or
squandering Petronas-generated revenues.
Shrouded disclosure has often stoked suspicions, though. For
instance, controversy erupted in 1998 when Petronas, through its
shipping carrier Malaysian International Shipping Corp Berhad (MISC),
inexplicably acquired a debt-laden shipping concern, Konsortium
Perkapalan Bhd (KPB). Some analysts felt the suspect deal amounted to
a bailout of then-prime minister Mahathir Mohamad's son, Mirzan
Mahathir, whose KPB was then floundering under debts estimated at
about RM1.7 billion (US$457,000).
The 'dark holes' of the future
When Malaysia's oil wells finally run dry, which could come sooner
than many of Malaysia's 24 million population anticipate, concerns
are growing that the resource-rich country may have little to show
for decades of bumper petroleum profits, apart from a few fading
trophy projects and deep, dark holes in the ocean floor.
To be sure, Petronas' record profits have to be tempered against
Malaysia's limited oil reserves and the steadily increasing cost of
exploration. Total domestic crude and oil-condensate reserves are
officially estimated at about 4.8 billion barrels, equivalent to a
reserve life of about 19 years. For natural gas, which makes up some
75% of Malaysia's total reserves, the reserve life is estimated at a
longer 33 years. At current rates of production, however, some energy
analysts predict that Malaysia could swing from being a net exporter
to net importer by the end of the decade.
Petronas has recently aggressively expanded its exploration and
international business operations, leveraging its technical expertise
into joint ventures in resource-rich and often politically unstable
countries such as Sudan, Myanmar, Turkmenistan, Niger, Chad and, to a
lesser degree, Egypt and the Malaysia-Thailand Joint Development
Area. The company has also ramped up exploration activities at home.
Petronas, Malaysia's only bona fide multinational company, currently
manages 59 energy ventures in 26 different countries around the
world. Last year, it spent RM7.5 billion on new international
explorations, mainly in Sudan's war-ravaged oilfields, as well as
liquefied-natural-gas work in Egypt. These ventures have allowed the
company to build up international reserves of 5.92 billion barrels of
oil equivalent (boe), of which crude accounts for 2.15 billion boe,
with the remainder in gas.
Apart from boosting profits, those ventures have exposed Petronas to
periodic criticism that its overseas activities help to prop up
financially some of the world's more loathsome, human-rights-abusing
regimes. Still, most energy-industry analysts believe that Petronas,
the only Malaysian company in the Fortune 500, has managerially done
well for itself considering the heightened global competition for new
finds from China, India and the United States.
"It is easily the best, that is, the most professionally run,
corporation in Malaysia, with a proven track record of competing not
only locally but internationally," said political scientist Andrew
Aeria, a Malaysia-based academic who closely monitors political and
economic developments. "[It's just a] pity its coffers have always
been raided by the BN [Barisan Nasional, Malaysia's ruling coalition]
government to bail out crony project failures."
At the same time, some company insiders contend that Petronas' recent
rash of profits have also bred a measurable degree of complacency.
"Petronas can afford to take risks now as it is sitting on a pile of
reserves and making huge profits," said a management staffer for a
joint venture between Petronas and a foreign firm. "When a firm is in
such an enviable situation, wastage, slow transfer of technology and
a lack of top management oversight in certain areas are not usually
apparent, but these can happen."
Fading trophies
During the tenure of Mahathir Mohamad, Petronas profits were often
used to fund massive, one-off prestige projects. The list of Petronas-
funded trophy projects is as long as it is extravagant, including the
posh new administrative capital at Putrajaya, sponsorship of a
Formula One motor-racing team, and the company's own twin-tower
office buildings in downtown Kuala Lumpur, which fleetingly stood as
the tallest skyscraper in the world.
Under Abdullah, there appear to be fewer big-ticket projects, though
ailing public and private firms, such as Malaysia Airlines, have
asked for and received financial assistance in times of need. Because
30% of the government's revenues come from Petronas, the company at
least indirectly helps to bail out government-favored businesses.
"Petronas has been very responsible. They have made a huge
contribution towards the development of the country," Abdullah
recently said.
Petronas profits, critics contend, could have been more prudently
invested in smaller, self-sustaining ventures that would act to
enhance the country's future competitiveness. There is a growing
sense that, with the limited life of the oilfields, a golden national
opportunity was squandered. Other oil-rich countries with diminishing
oil and gas resources, most notably Norway, have set aside funds for
economic development once the national wells run dry.
"The fact is that all those years of financial profligacy under Dr
Mahathir are now coming home to roost,'' said political scientist Aeria.
Petronas, for its part, argues that its involvement in Formula One
racing has allowed it to develop its automotive engineering
technology, enhance its lubricants and heighten its brand recognition
globally. In January, Petronas signed a memorandum of intent with
national car maker Proton, whose market share has been steadily
declining in Malaysia and has not been notably successful in the
export market, to explore the possibility of using the new-fangled
"Petronas E01" commercial engine technology, engineered through its
involvement in Formula One, to develop environment-friendly fuel
systems for Proton.
During Mahathir's tenure, Petronas was also roped in to provide
generous subsidies for new independent power producers (IPPs), which
built a string of gas-fueled electricity generating plants in the
1990s. Since the 1997 crisis, Petronas has supplied heavily
subsidized processed gas to Tenaga Nasional Bhd, the national power
corporation, as well as the IPPs. So far those subsidies have totaled
RM25 billion, according to Petronas. These subsidies helped ensure
that the IPPs' venture into the power industry has been largely
profitable.
Critics complain that the special arrangement enriches a handful of
well-connected, wealthy tycoons. Last year, business news group The
Edge identified the IPP beneficiaries as Genting Sanyen Power, YTL
Power, Malakoff Bhd and Tanjong Plc/Powertek Bhd, saying that "these
companies are controlled by the families of Tan Sri Lim Goh Tong, Tan
Sri Yeoh Tiong Lay, Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar Al-Bukhary and Ananda
Krishnan, four of the richest families and individuals in the
country", according to its website.
It is still unclear whether the subsidies on processed gas supplied
by Petronas to the IPPs will also be affected by recent price hikes.
If so, it could mean higher electricity prices just around the
corner. Many Malaysians are unaware of the subsidies to IPPs and the
local media have been largely silent on the issue. But the issue
threatens to become a political hot potato.
"Petronas' subsidies to the IPPs of RM14 billion since 1997 must be
abolished," said Lim Guan Eng, secretary general of the opposition
Democratic Action Party. "As the IPPs are private companies enjoying
special rates for generating electrical power that Tenaga is forced
to purchase, there is no reason for IPPs to enjoy such huge
subsidies ... at Tenaga's and Malaysian consumers' expense."
True or false, Petronas now stands at a somewhat uncomfortable
crossroads. Many Malaysians are unclear about how the savings on
subsidies will be used, although the government says the money will
be used to improve public transport and other undisclosed development
projects.
Despite decades earning massive profits for state coffers, as the
government rolls back subsidies on domestic fuel prices, the
company's opaque finances are finally being called into question.
Hopes are rising that the unexpected upshot in the national oil
firm's record profits, ironically, could also generate a clearer
account of exactly how Petronas distributes and spends its massive
profits.
Anil Netto is a freelance writer based in Penang, Malaysia.
(Copyright 2006 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about sales, syndication and republishing .)
10 March 2006
Southeast Asia
Petronas profits create friction
By Anil Netto
PENANG, Malaysia - Petronas, Malaysia's national petroleum
corporation, like many other multinational energy companies, is
riding the crest of soaring global fuel prices and raking in record
revenues and profits. However, those globally pumped-up profits are
causing a stir on the Malaysian street, with protesters calling the
company's historically opaque finances into question.
For the fiscal year ending in March 2005, the state-run corporation
recorded a pre-tax profit of US$15 billion, up 55% from the previous
year, contributing 30% of the Malaysian government's total revenues.
This year's profits are tipped to climb even higher on the back of
spiraling global oil prices, potentially representing the best
financial results in Petronas' 32-year corporate history.
But those gains are not coming without controversy. Last week the
Malaysian government reduced fuel subsidies and allowed the local
price of gasoline, diesel and liquefied petroleum gas to float,
leading to a rise of 18% to 23% depending on the fuel source. The
policy move was the latest in a series of incremental and unpopular
price hikes over the past two years. More recently, rising domestic
prices have renewed national arguments for more interventionist and
less neo-liberal economic policy prescriptions.
Malaysia famously bucked conventional economic wisdom when it applied
capital controls in the wake of the 1997-98 Asian financial crisis -
a move that in effect insulated the Malaysian economy from the
ravages sharp currency depreciations wrought on Thailand and
Indonesia. Now, in the era of spiraling global fuel prices, many in
Malaysia believe that, as a net fuel exporter, fuel subsidies could
provide the country's export-dependent economy a competitive boost
and insulate the domestic economy from inflationary pressures.
That argument is finding popular expression through a string of
street demonstrations and protests that have put Prime Minister
Abdullah Badawi's government on the defensive. The government says
the price hikes are necessary to curb over-consumption, to discourage
smuggling and to remove subsidy-generated market distortions. The
government also argues that Malaysia's fuel prices are still among
the lowest in Southeast Asia, apart from oil-rich Brunei.
Public anger has perhaps predictably focused on Petronas' big bottom
line and, perhaps more important, on how those massive profits are
used and potentially abused. The company's critics have long
complained that elected politicians, rather than pumping petro-
profits back into sustainable economic activities, often dipped into
Petronas' reserves to finance economically unsustainable ventures or
to bail out politically connected firms with funds that could have
been better used for national development. No Malaysian minister or
senior politician has ever been held to account for misallocating or
squandering Petronas-generated revenues.
Shrouded disclosure has often stoked suspicions, though. For
instance, controversy erupted in 1998 when Petronas, through its
shipping carrier Malaysian International Shipping Corp Berhad (MISC),
inexplicably acquired a debt-laden shipping concern, Konsortium
Perkapalan Bhd (KPB). Some analysts felt the suspect deal amounted to
a bailout of then-prime minister Mahathir Mohamad's son, Mirzan
Mahathir, whose KPB was then floundering under debts estimated at
about RM1.7 billion (US$457,000).
The 'dark holes' of the future
When Malaysia's oil wells finally run dry, which could come sooner
than many of Malaysia's 24 million population anticipate, concerns
are growing that the resource-rich country may have little to show
for decades of bumper petroleum profits, apart from a few fading
trophy projects and deep, dark holes in the ocean floor.
To be sure, Petronas' record profits have to be tempered against
Malaysia's limited oil reserves and the steadily increasing cost of
exploration. Total domestic crude and oil-condensate reserves are
officially estimated at about 4.8 billion barrels, equivalent to a
reserve life of about 19 years. For natural gas, which makes up some
75% of Malaysia's total reserves, the reserve life is estimated at a
longer 33 years. At current rates of production, however, some energy
analysts predict that Malaysia could swing from being a net exporter
to net importer by the end of the decade.
Petronas has recently aggressively expanded its exploration and
international business operations, leveraging its technical expertise
into joint ventures in resource-rich and often politically unstable
countries such as Sudan, Myanmar, Turkmenistan, Niger, Chad and, to a
lesser degree, Egypt and the Malaysia-Thailand Joint Development
Area. The company has also ramped up exploration activities at home.
Petronas, Malaysia's only bona fide multinational company, currently
manages 59 energy ventures in 26 different countries around the
world. Last year, it spent RM7.5 billion on new international
explorations, mainly in Sudan's war-ravaged oilfields, as well as
liquefied-natural-gas work in Egypt. These ventures have allowed the
company to build up international reserves of 5.92 billion barrels of
oil equivalent (boe), of which crude accounts for 2.15 billion boe,
with the remainder in gas.
Apart from boosting profits, those ventures have exposed Petronas to
periodic criticism that its overseas activities help to prop up
financially some of the world's more loathsome, human-rights-abusing
regimes. Still, most energy-industry analysts believe that Petronas,
the only Malaysian company in the Fortune 500, has managerially done
well for itself considering the heightened global competition for new
finds from China, India and the United States.
"It is easily the best, that is, the most professionally run,
corporation in Malaysia, with a proven track record of competing not
only locally but internationally," said political scientist Andrew
Aeria, a Malaysia-based academic who closely monitors political and
economic developments. "[It's just a] pity its coffers have always
been raided by the BN [Barisan Nasional, Malaysia's ruling coalition]
government to bail out crony project failures."
At the same time, some company insiders contend that Petronas' recent
rash of profits have also bred a measurable degree of complacency.
"Petronas can afford to take risks now as it is sitting on a pile of
reserves and making huge profits," said a management staffer for a
joint venture between Petronas and a foreign firm. "When a firm is in
such an enviable situation, wastage, slow transfer of technology and
a lack of top management oversight in certain areas are not usually
apparent, but these can happen."
Fading trophies
During the tenure of Mahathir Mohamad, Petronas profits were often
used to fund massive, one-off prestige projects. The list of Petronas-
funded trophy projects is as long as it is extravagant, including the
posh new administrative capital at Putrajaya, sponsorship of a
Formula One motor-racing team, and the company's own twin-tower
office buildings in downtown Kuala Lumpur, which fleetingly stood as
the tallest skyscraper in the world.
Under Abdullah, there appear to be fewer big-ticket projects, though
ailing public and private firms, such as Malaysia Airlines, have
asked for and received financial assistance in times of need. Because
30% of the government's revenues come from Petronas, the company at
least indirectly helps to bail out government-favored businesses.
"Petronas has been very responsible. They have made a huge
contribution towards the development of the country," Abdullah
recently said.
Petronas profits, critics contend, could have been more prudently
invested in smaller, self-sustaining ventures that would act to
enhance the country's future competitiveness. There is a growing
sense that, with the limited life of the oilfields, a golden national
opportunity was squandered. Other oil-rich countries with diminishing
oil and gas resources, most notably Norway, have set aside funds for
economic development once the national wells run dry.
"The fact is that all those years of financial profligacy under Dr
Mahathir are now coming home to roost,'' said political scientist Aeria.
Petronas, for its part, argues that its involvement in Formula One
racing has allowed it to develop its automotive engineering
technology, enhance its lubricants and heighten its brand recognition
globally. In January, Petronas signed a memorandum of intent with
national car maker Proton, whose market share has been steadily
declining in Malaysia and has not been notably successful in the
export market, to explore the possibility of using the new-fangled
"Petronas E01" commercial engine technology, engineered through its
involvement in Formula One, to develop environment-friendly fuel
systems for Proton.
During Mahathir's tenure, Petronas was also roped in to provide
generous subsidies for new independent power producers (IPPs), which
built a string of gas-fueled electricity generating plants in the
1990s. Since the 1997 crisis, Petronas has supplied heavily
subsidized processed gas to Tenaga Nasional Bhd, the national power
corporation, as well as the IPPs. So far those subsidies have totaled
RM25 billion, according to Petronas. These subsidies helped ensure
that the IPPs' venture into the power industry has been largely
profitable.
Critics complain that the special arrangement enriches a handful of
well-connected, wealthy tycoons. Last year, business news group The
Edge identified the IPP beneficiaries as Genting Sanyen Power, YTL
Power, Malakoff Bhd and Tanjong Plc/Powertek Bhd, saying that "these
companies are controlled by the families of Tan Sri Lim Goh Tong, Tan
Sri Yeoh Tiong Lay, Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar Al-Bukhary and Ananda
Krishnan, four of the richest families and individuals in the
country", according to its website.
It is still unclear whether the subsidies on processed gas supplied
by Petronas to the IPPs will also be affected by recent price hikes.
If so, it could mean higher electricity prices just around the
corner. Many Malaysians are unaware of the subsidies to IPPs and the
local media have been largely silent on the issue. But the issue
threatens to become a political hot potato.
"Petronas' subsidies to the IPPs of RM14 billion since 1997 must be
abolished," said Lim Guan Eng, secretary general of the opposition
Democratic Action Party. "As the IPPs are private companies enjoying
special rates for generating electrical power that Tenaga is forced
to purchase, there is no reason for IPPs to enjoy such huge
subsidies ... at Tenaga's and Malaysian consumers' expense."
True or false, Petronas now stands at a somewhat uncomfortable
crossroads. Many Malaysians are unclear about how the savings on
subsidies will be used, although the government says the money will
be used to improve public transport and other undisclosed development
projects.
Despite decades earning massive profits for state coffers, as the
government rolls back subsidies on domestic fuel prices, the
company's opaque finances are finally being called into question.
Hopes are rising that the unexpected upshot in the national oil
firm's record profits, ironically, could also generate a clearer
account of exactly how Petronas distributes and spends its massive
profits.
Anil Netto is a freelance writer based in Penang, Malaysia.
(Copyright 2006 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about sales, syndication and republishing .)
We need a European approach to supporting democracy in Iran
The Guardian, London
We need a European approach to supporting democracy in Iran
Two clocks are ticking in Tehran. Obsessed with trying to stop the nuclear clock, we are neglecting the democracy clock
Timothy Garton Ash
Thursday March 9, 2006
Rome was not built in a day and Persia will not be changed in a day. As we contemplate our very limited options for influencing that ancient, self-referential and now defiant country, we must be clear that we are in for a long haul. We cannot make Iran peaceful and democratic; we can only help to create conditions in which Iranians themselves might eventually make it so.
Two clocks are ticking in Iran: the nuclear clock and the democracy clock. The strategic objective of western policy must be to slow down the nuclear clock and to speed up the democracy clock. Our problem is that some of the things we might do to slow down the nuclear clock are likely to slow down the democracy clock as well.
Millions of Iranians who are fiercely critical of the country's theocratic regime, and of its wildly ranting president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, also believe that Iran is entitled to civilian nuclear power. Many of them think that it's entitled to nuclear weapons aswell. If the west imposes sanctions just on the nuclear issue, without linking them to respect for human rights inside Iran, there will be an anti-western backlash among parts of the population who would otherwise be a force for change. That may well be what Ahmadinejad is counting on. There is method in his madness.
Yesterday's report of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) puts the issue of Iran's nuclear programme firmly before the UN security council but, despite American and European pressure, Russia and China are extremely reluctant to bring things to a crunch. The next step in the diplomatic dance will probably be a "presidential statement" from the security council, something well short of a condemnatory resolution and sanctions. Even that may be many weeks in the making.
If the security council does finally "impose meaningful consequences", as the US vice-president, Dick Cheney, put it on Tuesday, the Islamic Republic of Iran can strike back in two ways. First, it can do what it has already promised to do, and let rip with its nuclear enrichment programme, while stoking up a siege mentality at home with a propaganda of patriotic resistance to nefarious British-American imperial diktat. It can also make lots more trouble for the west and its allies in the Middle East by supporting more extreme elements in the Shia south of Iraq, in Hamas and in Hizbullah. Already, Iran's revolutionary guards are busy recruiting candidates for what they call "martyrdom-seeking operations". All this under the banner of leading Islamic resistance to western imperialism.
So as the nuclear diplomacy grinds on, we need to think urgently about theother track: speeding up the democracy clock. At first glance, we seem to have the familiar spectacle of a hard line from Washington and a soft line from Europe. In fact, Washington's line on democracy promotion is more complicated and Europe's is non-existent.
It's true that the same American neocons who talk of bombing Iran will also tell you their preferred option is to foment a revolution to overthrow the mullahs. Brave of them to risk other people's lives. Meanwhile, the Bush administration has announced a budget allocation of $85m to finance satellite television broadcasting to Iran, and other forms of support to civil society and elements of democratic opposition in the country. The senior state department official spearheading this effort is Elizabeth Cheney, the daughter of Dick Cheney - in itself enough to damn her in the eyes of many Europeans.
In a recent speech to the Foreign Policy Association, she argued that there are "many similarities and more than a few differences" between what happened in central Europe in the 1980s and the wider Middle East today. The "most direct parallel" she finds with the Solidarity movement in Poland is the role of women as the spearhead for change across the wider Middle East.Now you may - and I would - question the historical comparison with Solidarity. But you also have to answer these questions: do you think movements for the emancipation of women in the Muslim world are a good thing? Do you think we should be supporting them? If the answer is yes, then why don't you agree with her? Is it just because she's an American called Cheney?Rather than sitting on the sidelines carping at whatever Washington does, we Europeans should do something better ourselves. Instead of merely expressing (justified) scepticism about an American satellite TV channel for Iran, which will be widely seen there as Bush administration propaganda, we should be urging the British parliament to make money available for a 24-hour BBC satellite television service broadcasting to Iran in Farsi. For the BBC does have real credibility in Iran. Rather than just sniping at Washington's sometimes clumsy efforts at democracy promotion, we should be developing our own.
When I say we, I mean all the member states of the European Union, pooling their resources and know-how. After all, we - not the Americans - have the diplomats, businesspeople and journalists on the ground in Iran. Between our 25 countries, we have a unique body of experience about how democratic states can encourage peaceful change in their less democratic neighbours. In the last decades of the cold war, West Germany tried to do this with its Ostpolitik, and Poland, having been on the receiving end, can help us to learn from the mistakes of that Ostpolitik.
Not all the European precedents fit Iran, but some do. For example, we should be weaving a dense web of human contacts between Iranians and freer countries, as we did between the western and eastern halves of a divided Europe.Our universities should invite their academics and students, who have often been in the vanguard of standing up for free speech and human rights in Iran. Our newspapers and journalism schools should bring over their journalists. Our trades unions should hitch up with their unionists, some of whom have organised major strikes. Our parliaments should establish links with their parliament which, though far from fully democratic, has been giving Ahmadinejad a rough ride.
Writers, artists and filmmakers should be encouraged to travel to and fro, carrying ideas in both directions. Women's movements in Iran, representing half the population systematically discriminated against, should be supported by women's movements in Europe. Iran's Islamic thinkers and jurists, both reformist modernisers and conservatives, should be engaged in dialogue by theologians and scholars from other faith traditions. All this should be done less by our governments than by our own societies, and not just by America and Britain - traditionally distrusted by many Iranians - but by all European countries, working separately and together. We need a European Iranpolitik.
We cannot know in advance which parts of such a catalytic action will have what effects over what period. Certainly we are talking years not months. Iran is not Poland; and when change comes, it will come from Iranians working in a distinctively Iranian way. It may be that the nuclear clock will still tick too fast and the democracy clock too slow. But to work only on the nuclear clock, and not make any systematic attempt to speed up the other, is to condemn ourselves in advance to almost certain failure.
www.timothygartonash.com
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
We need a European approach to supporting democracy in Iran
Two clocks are ticking in Tehran. Obsessed with trying to stop the nuclear clock, we are neglecting the democracy clock
Timothy Garton Ash
Thursday March 9, 2006
Rome was not built in a day and Persia will not be changed in a day. As we contemplate our very limited options for influencing that ancient, self-referential and now defiant country, we must be clear that we are in for a long haul. We cannot make Iran peaceful and democratic; we can only help to create conditions in which Iranians themselves might eventually make it so.
Two clocks are ticking in Iran: the nuclear clock and the democracy clock. The strategic objective of western policy must be to slow down the nuclear clock and to speed up the democracy clock. Our problem is that some of the things we might do to slow down the nuclear clock are likely to slow down the democracy clock as well.
Millions of Iranians who are fiercely critical of the country's theocratic regime, and of its wildly ranting president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, also believe that Iran is entitled to civilian nuclear power. Many of them think that it's entitled to nuclear weapons aswell. If the west imposes sanctions just on the nuclear issue, without linking them to respect for human rights inside Iran, there will be an anti-western backlash among parts of the population who would otherwise be a force for change. That may well be what Ahmadinejad is counting on. There is method in his madness.
Yesterday's report of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) puts the issue of Iran's nuclear programme firmly before the UN security council but, despite American and European pressure, Russia and China are extremely reluctant to bring things to a crunch. The next step in the diplomatic dance will probably be a "presidential statement" from the security council, something well short of a condemnatory resolution and sanctions. Even that may be many weeks in the making.
If the security council does finally "impose meaningful consequences", as the US vice-president, Dick Cheney, put it on Tuesday, the Islamic Republic of Iran can strike back in two ways. First, it can do what it has already promised to do, and let rip with its nuclear enrichment programme, while stoking up a siege mentality at home with a propaganda of patriotic resistance to nefarious British-American imperial diktat. It can also make lots more trouble for the west and its allies in the Middle East by supporting more extreme elements in the Shia south of Iraq, in Hamas and in Hizbullah. Already, Iran's revolutionary guards are busy recruiting candidates for what they call "martyrdom-seeking operations". All this under the banner of leading Islamic resistance to western imperialism.
So as the nuclear diplomacy grinds on, we need to think urgently about theother track: speeding up the democracy clock. At first glance, we seem to have the familiar spectacle of a hard line from Washington and a soft line from Europe. In fact, Washington's line on democracy promotion is more complicated and Europe's is non-existent.
It's true that the same American neocons who talk of bombing Iran will also tell you their preferred option is to foment a revolution to overthrow the mullahs. Brave of them to risk other people's lives. Meanwhile, the Bush administration has announced a budget allocation of $85m to finance satellite television broadcasting to Iran, and other forms of support to civil society and elements of democratic opposition in the country. The senior state department official spearheading this effort is Elizabeth Cheney, the daughter of Dick Cheney - in itself enough to damn her in the eyes of many Europeans.
In a recent speech to the Foreign Policy Association, she argued that there are "many similarities and more than a few differences" between what happened in central Europe in the 1980s and the wider Middle East today. The "most direct parallel" she finds with the Solidarity movement in Poland is the role of women as the spearhead for change across the wider Middle East.Now you may - and I would - question the historical comparison with Solidarity. But you also have to answer these questions: do you think movements for the emancipation of women in the Muslim world are a good thing? Do you think we should be supporting them? If the answer is yes, then why don't you agree with her? Is it just because she's an American called Cheney?Rather than sitting on the sidelines carping at whatever Washington does, we Europeans should do something better ourselves. Instead of merely expressing (justified) scepticism about an American satellite TV channel for Iran, which will be widely seen there as Bush administration propaganda, we should be urging the British parliament to make money available for a 24-hour BBC satellite television service broadcasting to Iran in Farsi. For the BBC does have real credibility in Iran. Rather than just sniping at Washington's sometimes clumsy efforts at democracy promotion, we should be developing our own.
When I say we, I mean all the member states of the European Union, pooling their resources and know-how. After all, we - not the Americans - have the diplomats, businesspeople and journalists on the ground in Iran. Between our 25 countries, we have a unique body of experience about how democratic states can encourage peaceful change in their less democratic neighbours. In the last decades of the cold war, West Germany tried to do this with its Ostpolitik, and Poland, having been on the receiving end, can help us to learn from the mistakes of that Ostpolitik.
Not all the European precedents fit Iran, but some do. For example, we should be weaving a dense web of human contacts between Iranians and freer countries, as we did between the western and eastern halves of a divided Europe.Our universities should invite their academics and students, who have often been in the vanguard of standing up for free speech and human rights in Iran. Our newspapers and journalism schools should bring over their journalists. Our trades unions should hitch up with their unionists, some of whom have organised major strikes. Our parliaments should establish links with their parliament which, though far from fully democratic, has been giving Ahmadinejad a rough ride.
Writers, artists and filmmakers should be encouraged to travel to and fro, carrying ideas in both directions. Women's movements in Iran, representing half the population systematically discriminated against, should be supported by women's movements in Europe. Iran's Islamic thinkers and jurists, both reformist modernisers and conservatives, should be engaged in dialogue by theologians and scholars from other faith traditions. All this should be done less by our governments than by our own societies, and not just by America and Britain - traditionally distrusted by many Iranians - but by all European countries, working separately and together. We need a European Iranpolitik.
We cannot know in advance which parts of such a catalytic action will have what effects over what period. Certainly we are talking years not months. Iran is not Poland; and when change comes, it will come from Iranians working in a distinctively Iranian way. It may be that the nuclear clock will still tick too fast and the democracy clock too slow. But to work only on the nuclear clock, and not make any systematic attempt to speed up the other, is to condemn ourselves in advance to almost certain failure.
www.timothygartonash.com
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
Understanding Madrasahs
Foreign Affairs, New York
January/February 2006
Understanding Madrasahs
How threatening are they?
Alexander Evans
Madrasahs, the religious schools that educated millions of students in the Muslim world, have been blamed for all sorts of ills since the attacks of September 11, 2001. Critics have denounced them as dens of terror, hatcheries of suicide bombers, and repositeries of medievalism. As Samina Ahmad and Andrew Stoehlein of the International Crisis Group wrote in the Washington Post after last July's London bombers, "Jihadi extremism is still propagated at radical madrasahs in Pakistan ... And now, it seems the hatred these madrasahs breed is spilling blood in Western cities as well."
These criticisms have focussed on the few dozen Pakistani madrasahs that served as de facto training grounds for jihadists fighting the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s. Many of these jihadists went on to become foot soldiers in later campaigns, including those against Indian rule over Kashmir and against Shiite Muslims within Pakistan. They also helped forge the Taliban and gave succour and support to Osama bin Laden. From this record, critics have put together a seemingly convincing charge sheet against madrasahs across the Muslim world. They extrapolate from this relatively small number of problem madrasahs in Pakistan and come to the conclusion that all madrasahs breed fanatics.But they are wrong. The majority of madrasahs actually present an opportunity, not a threat. For young village kids, it may be their only path of literacy. For many orphans and the rural poor, madrasahs provide essential social services: education and lodging for children who otherwise could well find themselves the victims of forced labour, sex trafficking, or other abuses. And for US and European policymakers, madrasahs offer an important arena for public diplomacy – a chance to ensure that the Muslim leaders of tomorrow do not see the West as an enemy inherently hostile to all Muslim institutions.
Rather than undermining the madrasah system, then, Western policymakers should engaqe it. Beards and bombast may make for good newspaper copy, but the reality of the madrasah system is far different: it is characterized by both orthodoxy and diversity and is host to a quiet debate abour reform. It is the interest of the West to ensure that the outliers – truly extremist madarahs – are contained and advocates or apologists for terrorism are duty prosecuted. But it is equally important for policymakers to pursue this goal, by encouraging internal debate rather than demanding changes from above. The best incentive for reform is competition rather than control.
Tenured radicals?
The West consensus on madrasahs assumed lthat some of them produce terrorists and many others contribute to radicalization in less direct ways. But the evidence to a direct link to terrorism remains weak. Indeed, according to Marc Sageman"s recent study, 'Understanding Terror Networks', two-thirds of contemporary Al Qaeda- affiliated terrorists went to state of Western-style colleges. Like the terrorist Ahmad Sheikh (who was a contemporary of mine at the London School of Economics), terrorists today are more likely to have gone through the regular educational system. Many are newly religious rebels rather than regular ulama (clergy), created by modernity rather than by madrasah.
In fact, despite the hype and the headlines, remarkably little serious work has been done on the subject of madrasahs. (This problem, fortunately, is slowly changing, with academics such as Saleem Ali, Tahir Andrabi, and Yoginder Sikand paving the way with detailed, evidence-based studies.) Few journalists bother to get to know more than a token institution, and most academics shy away from studying them; the leaders of madrasahs themselves prefer to get on with what they do rather than talk about it. There are thens of thousands of madrasahs, with millions of students, but the numerical data on them – usually drawn from government statistics, media speculation, or the dubious assertions of madrasah defenders and denouncers – are generally unreliable. In India, for example, estimates of the number of madrasahs range from 3,000 to 30,000, with up to 1.5 million students estimated to be enrolled. Some reports claim that Bangladesh has 64,000 madrasahs, Pakistan, meanwhile, is said to have anywhere from 400,000 to 1.7 million students enrolled.
Madrasahs serve parts of developing countries that governments never reach. Turn off any main highway in Pakistan, Bangladesh or northern India, drive 15 miles down a poor-quality road, and more often than note you will find a small madrasah, funded by donations and occasionally fees. in the nearest village. Even in the cities, where there are many more government and other private schools, madrasahs survive as providers of social services for Muslim orphans (many of whom are taken in and brought up for free). Meanwhile, many Muslim parents choose to send their sons (it is usually sons) to madrasahs because they consider the education they get there to be a respectiable one.
The madrasah system is a thousand years old. It originated in 11th century Baghdad, and the recorded South Asian madrasah was established in Ajmer (now a city in India) in 1191. In medieval times, madrasahs were instruments of the state – fundered by rulers and steadfastly loyal – and focussed on Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh). Over time and with the advent of the Mughal empire in South Asia, the curriculum expanded, first to include philosphy, logic and the rational disciplines (maqalat) and then to include the study of reports of the words and deeds of the Prophet Mohamad (hadith) as well. Madrasahs were also bastions of social exclusion. They served as prestigious training schools for imperial officials and religious scholars, catering to and funded by the Muslim elite.
The advent of British control over South Asia, however, undermined this elite and led to important changes in the madrasah system. English replaced Persian as the language of official correspondent in the 1830s (thanks to the East India company), and missionaries began establishing English-language alternatives to religious schools. The bigger came in the aftermath of the failed uprising in 1857 against the British rule in India. Muslim scholars already sidelined, retreated into – seeking to defend Islam against the onslaught of Christian influence, even as they watched the death of Mughal rule in India. From this transition, the Darul Uloom madrasah emerged in Deobandi, India. Established entirely with private support in 1865, it became the center for a new-found scriptural conservatism in Islam. The foundation of Darul Uloom also marked a closing of doors to modern knowledge, which was not seen as polluting because of its association with the British. Deobandis (as those associated with Darul Uloom became known) worked hard to spread the message across northern India, and the social composition of madrasahs began to change, becoming less affluent and more rural.
Darul Uloom, where 10,000 young men compete for 800 spots in any given year, remains the centre of the Deobandi movement. The movement is still ultra-conservative, and it helped define the Taliban's purist ideology.
In large part because of its role in shaping the Taliban's rule, the Deobandi movement is the prism through which most obervers analyze the entire Madrasah system. But there are other influential schools, and many of them are less conservative. The thousands of Barelvi madrasahs across South Asia, including Pakistan, take a broader view of heterdox Sufi traditions. Shiite madrasahs are principally designed for elementary education and leave higher study to learning centers in the Middle East. Since the 1949s, the Islamist Jammat-e- Islami – an avowedly modern Muslim organisation dedicated to combining a conservative, Islamist worldview with a commitment to education across the modern sciences – has established many schools of its own, although formally it does not support madrasahs.
To be sure, madrasahs are naturally narrow-minded institutions.Non- Muslims, particularly Jews, are regularly portrayed in a negative or hostile light and described as 'najis' (impure) or 'jahil' (ignorant). But it is wrong to blame madrasahs alone for such views: the same prejudice is prevalent in bazaars, private homes, and even government-funded schools in the Muslim world.
Critics have also focussed on the sources of funding for madrasahs – which are not tax dollars but charity and, in some case, tuition fees. Some of the charitable funding comes from overseas, especially radical Islamists in the Gulf region (although these funds have decreased of late). The largest madrasahs receive over $1.5 million a year, but many smaller ones exist of a few hundred dollars a year, more of which comes from local funding than is usually assumed. In any case, funds from extremists have only a limited influence on individual madrasahs. Even after five decades of funding, many South Asian madrasahs are run by teachers who reject Wahabbism and its various sisters. In fact, across South Asian extremists – as distinct from ultra-conservatives – actually control only a tiny portion of madrasahs.
It is also wrong to assume, as most current commentary does, that madrasahs have stood still for the past several centuries. Although they could be much more, there is plenty of innovation within the world of madrasahs. In my visits to dozens of institutions in Bangladesh, India and Pakistan, I have found English classes, a journalism-training center, and computer labs. I have met stimulating and thoughtful principals who are determined to prove the best possible education. I have also sat down with dour and insipid madrasah directors suspicious of anything that might diminish their standing in their school or the wider community. And, once or twice, I have bumped into seriously nasty radicals. (Unsurprisingly, a great deal depends of the individual running a madrasah.)
Even Darul Uloom is slowly evolving. Over the past five years, it has introduced English and computing. Some 40 pupils just over one percent of the student body – learn English. Within the Deobandi movement, there is a growing debate about madrasah reform. So far, the conservatives have dominated. But senior ulama now welcome greater contact with the outside world. "We should not be shy of media people", one told me when I was invited in July 2005. "We are not lthieves."
No Madrasah is an Island
For hundreds of years, madrasahs have changed as Muslim societies have changed. The change has always been a mixture of resisting, reacting, and innovating – just as with educational systems anywhere.
The past decade has produced fresh incentives for reform – and madrasahs are slowly responding. First, there has been a sharp rise in English-language private schools, since middle class parents want their children to have the right skills to get good jobs. The most prestigious madrasahs, such as Darul Uloom, dismiss this trend as irrelevant because it has not led to a fall in applications. But in smaller towns, the rise of private schools has already limited the ability of fee-charging to attact enough students. In some cases, this problem has stimulated broader thinking about including English- language instruction.
Innovation and reform also stem fromm a recognition that madrasah graduates are more likely to access decent tertiary education and a wider range of employment opportunities if the curriculum is widened. In India, some madrasah students are already breaking through – becoming doctors, lawyers, and software engineers. They often find that the discipline of madrasah training helps them focus on further studies, even if the educational basis they began with was narrower (but deeper) than that of many of their peers. And madrasah students themselves are keen to see reform, including the introduction of English or other local languages such as Hindi or Bengali alongside with traditional Islamic subjects.
Cynics rightly point out that reform is also being stimulated by the emphasis on missionary activity (dawa).Leading ulema are recognizing that in order to reach non-Muslims (and many Muslim besides), English is an increasingly important medium. And in order to counter other religions, more than a basic (and polemical) grounding is needed in Christianity, Hinduism, and Buddhism. These leaders are eager to ensure that the next generation of Muslim ulema can communicate in English. Generational change is also playing its part. Some of the younger innovators share a commitment to Islamic education but also want to attract brighter and able students.
Given all the media attacks on madrasahs, a backlash would not be surprising. Instead, ulama within the madrasah system are increasingly open to communicatio with the outside world. In India, leading lights of the madrasah movement have since 1995 began regularly calling for greater reaction with the media, intellectuals and government officials. And most important, no madrasah is an island. Deobandi ulema have been issued a fatwar against television, but cellular are ubiquitous in most madrasahs, Madrasah students do not live lives of seclusion. despite the intensity of the curriculum.
Sense and sensitivity
Governments have adopted two basic approaches to madrasahs: regulation and reform. The first approach involves extending or introducing government regulations, ranging from compulsory madrasah- registration schemes to curriculum reform to President Pervez Musharraf's July 2005 ruling that all foreign students must leave Pakistani madrasahs. Governments have also demanded that independent madrasahs adopt the country's regular core curriculum. Other steps have included registering students, creating an approved list of principals, imposing financial controls – or shutting down particular problem madrasahs. Reform interventions, meanwhile, seek to undercut madrasahs but improving state capacity. This usually means spending large sums of money to extend government schools into areas they previously did not reach or making state education compulsory.
Both strategies can run intto the sand. The trouble with regulatory interventions is they can easily prove excessive or even counterproductive. Registration is not unreasonable, but it has little effect other than to create lists of institutions, students and principals. Enforced curriculum reform is likely to generate a backlash. Madrasahs as a whoile are designed to transmit a religious tradition, and their independence is a core part of their identity. Many graduates from the better madrasahs resent any notion of enforced regulations, and these same graduates are often the best critics of the madrasah system, recognising its shortfalls as they go on either to run madrasahs of their own or to enter mainstream employment.
Given the scale of the challenge, reform interventions are also bound to fail. Spending more money – whether government or donor funds – on education in general is not going to displace madrasahs anytime soon. Improving the reach and effectiveness of public education will take a long time, and parents often choose madrasahs for their children even when state-provided education is available – often for the prestige of having a son studying Islam and entering an Islamic profession.
When it comes to the choice between forcing change and fostering change, India, with a Muslim population of 138 million or more, illustrates one way forward. Historically, madrasahs there have had a lot of independence, and Article 30 (i) of the Indian constitution guarantees minorities (Muslims, Sikhs and Christians) the right to establish and administer their own educational institutions. But the Indian government still has recourse if any one madrasah becomes problematic: it can invoke laws against incitement to violence if a madrasah principle advocates terrorism.
Indian educational officials have occasionally considered a more hard- line approach, especially in the late 1990s, when concerns about radicalization were abnormally high. But after careful consideration, the same officials have come to the conclusion that the best change comes from within: let madrasah speak to the madrasah, and principal to principal, so that the formers can influence the others. One initiative that has come out of this approach is a scheme to pay for English, math and science teachers in private madrasahs that choose to participate. If a madrasah principal decides to apply, he gets a fully funded teacher in one of these subjects. It also makes good sense for the madrasah (since it gets a free resource) and good sense for the government, too, as it thereby demonstrates the benefits of having this subject in addition to the traditional curriculum. In 2001, 3,500 of 6,000 madrasahs in the Indian state of Madhya Pradesh received funds for teachers of modern subjects, reaching some 175,00 students. The Indian government has also provided teacher training for madrasah teachers in Delhi.
The Indian approach is predicated on consent. It is both sensitive and sensible. India's leaders are aware of the dangers of a backlash if they intervene forefully. And unlike the thinking underlying much of the overblown press comment, the basic assumption behind the government's approach is that madrasahs play a valuable role in society, even if the education they provide is more narrow than it should be.
The invisible hand
Madrasahs do not need to be closed, contained or cut down to size. Thousands play an important social role. And the leaders of most madrasahs are willing to consider changing the way they work, although they are bound to defend what they stand for.
To be sure, there are problem madrasahs, led by extremists who preach venom. These madrasahs, may of which are Pakistani, tend to trigger provocative media coverage. But they do not dominate. Go to the largest neighbouring madrasah or a "problem" madrasah, you will find a group of tut-tutting saying, gently but insistently, that their madrasah "isn't political like that one." Problem madrasahs need to be challenged, but as individual institutions, each with its own problems that do not necessarily reflect the reality of the entire system. The particular fault lies often lies with the principal, rather than with the madrasah as a whole. And most countries have the legislation in place to proceed against the principals if they incite violence or coach potential terrorists. Passing news rules or restrictions makes little sense if the existing laws are not being applied effectively.
Of course, the most effective challenge to these problem madrasahs will come from their peers, not state intervention. Al Qaeda is as much an idea as it is a movement or an organisation, and ideas, good and bad, often work like infections. Distant regulators, disgusted officials, and worried Westerners can only do so much, but madrasah principals, graduates, graduates, and ulema wield enormous power. In short, the best debate on madrasah reform will come from within.
What is needed most is a thoughtful evidence-based approach to madrasahs. Policymakers should visit them, research them, and understand them, all the while being sure to understand that their actions could have unintended consequences. They should encourage modernisation but avoid insisting on secularisation, which would be taken as a declaration of war on Muslim education. They should seek to stimulate conversation and competition among madrasahs while allowing them their freedom. Attempting to change madrasahs through compulsion and control is unlikely to deliver positive results. Reform of the madrasah system will ultimately spurred by competition from within – and the more competition the better.
Alexander Evans works for the British Foreign and Commonwealth office. The views expressed here are his own and not those of the British government
January/February 2006
Understanding Madrasahs
How threatening are they?
Alexander Evans
Madrasahs, the religious schools that educated millions of students in the Muslim world, have been blamed for all sorts of ills since the attacks of September 11, 2001. Critics have denounced them as dens of terror, hatcheries of suicide bombers, and repositeries of medievalism. As Samina Ahmad and Andrew Stoehlein of the International Crisis Group wrote in the Washington Post after last July's London bombers, "Jihadi extremism is still propagated at radical madrasahs in Pakistan ... And now, it seems the hatred these madrasahs breed is spilling blood in Western cities as well."
These criticisms have focussed on the few dozen Pakistani madrasahs that served as de facto training grounds for jihadists fighting the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s. Many of these jihadists went on to become foot soldiers in later campaigns, including those against Indian rule over Kashmir and against Shiite Muslims within Pakistan. They also helped forge the Taliban and gave succour and support to Osama bin Laden. From this record, critics have put together a seemingly convincing charge sheet against madrasahs across the Muslim world. They extrapolate from this relatively small number of problem madrasahs in Pakistan and come to the conclusion that all madrasahs breed fanatics.But they are wrong. The majority of madrasahs actually present an opportunity, not a threat. For young village kids, it may be their only path of literacy. For many orphans and the rural poor, madrasahs provide essential social services: education and lodging for children who otherwise could well find themselves the victims of forced labour, sex trafficking, or other abuses. And for US and European policymakers, madrasahs offer an important arena for public diplomacy – a chance to ensure that the Muslim leaders of tomorrow do not see the West as an enemy inherently hostile to all Muslim institutions.
Rather than undermining the madrasah system, then, Western policymakers should engaqe it. Beards and bombast may make for good newspaper copy, but the reality of the madrasah system is far different: it is characterized by both orthodoxy and diversity and is host to a quiet debate abour reform. It is the interest of the West to ensure that the outliers – truly extremist madarahs – are contained and advocates or apologists for terrorism are duty prosecuted. But it is equally important for policymakers to pursue this goal, by encouraging internal debate rather than demanding changes from above. The best incentive for reform is competition rather than control.
Tenured radicals?
The West consensus on madrasahs assumed lthat some of them produce terrorists and many others contribute to radicalization in less direct ways. But the evidence to a direct link to terrorism remains weak. Indeed, according to Marc Sageman"s recent study, 'Understanding Terror Networks', two-thirds of contemporary Al Qaeda- affiliated terrorists went to state of Western-style colleges. Like the terrorist Ahmad Sheikh (who was a contemporary of mine at the London School of Economics), terrorists today are more likely to have gone through the regular educational system. Many are newly religious rebels rather than regular ulama (clergy), created by modernity rather than by madrasah.
In fact, despite the hype and the headlines, remarkably little serious work has been done on the subject of madrasahs. (This problem, fortunately, is slowly changing, with academics such as Saleem Ali, Tahir Andrabi, and Yoginder Sikand paving the way with detailed, evidence-based studies.) Few journalists bother to get to know more than a token institution, and most academics shy away from studying them; the leaders of madrasahs themselves prefer to get on with what they do rather than talk about it. There are thens of thousands of madrasahs, with millions of students, but the numerical data on them – usually drawn from government statistics, media speculation, or the dubious assertions of madrasah defenders and denouncers – are generally unreliable. In India, for example, estimates of the number of madrasahs range from 3,000 to 30,000, with up to 1.5 million students estimated to be enrolled. Some reports claim that Bangladesh has 64,000 madrasahs, Pakistan, meanwhile, is said to have anywhere from 400,000 to 1.7 million students enrolled.
Madrasahs serve parts of developing countries that governments never reach. Turn off any main highway in Pakistan, Bangladesh or northern India, drive 15 miles down a poor-quality road, and more often than note you will find a small madrasah, funded by donations and occasionally fees. in the nearest village. Even in the cities, where there are many more government and other private schools, madrasahs survive as providers of social services for Muslim orphans (many of whom are taken in and brought up for free). Meanwhile, many Muslim parents choose to send their sons (it is usually sons) to madrasahs because they consider the education they get there to be a respectiable one.
The madrasah system is a thousand years old. It originated in 11th century Baghdad, and the recorded South Asian madrasah was established in Ajmer (now a city in India) in 1191. In medieval times, madrasahs were instruments of the state – fundered by rulers and steadfastly loyal – and focussed on Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh). Over time and with the advent of the Mughal empire in South Asia, the curriculum expanded, first to include philosphy, logic and the rational disciplines (maqalat) and then to include the study of reports of the words and deeds of the Prophet Mohamad (hadith) as well. Madrasahs were also bastions of social exclusion. They served as prestigious training schools for imperial officials and religious scholars, catering to and funded by the Muslim elite.
The advent of British control over South Asia, however, undermined this elite and led to important changes in the madrasah system. English replaced Persian as the language of official correspondent in the 1830s (thanks to the East India company), and missionaries began establishing English-language alternatives to religious schools. The bigger came in the aftermath of the failed uprising in 1857 against the British rule in India. Muslim scholars already sidelined, retreated into – seeking to defend Islam against the onslaught of Christian influence, even as they watched the death of Mughal rule in India. From this transition, the Darul Uloom madrasah emerged in Deobandi, India. Established entirely with private support in 1865, it became the center for a new-found scriptural conservatism in Islam. The foundation of Darul Uloom also marked a closing of doors to modern knowledge, which was not seen as polluting because of its association with the British. Deobandis (as those associated with Darul Uloom became known) worked hard to spread the message across northern India, and the social composition of madrasahs began to change, becoming less affluent and more rural.
Darul Uloom, where 10,000 young men compete for 800 spots in any given year, remains the centre of the Deobandi movement. The movement is still ultra-conservative, and it helped define the Taliban's purist ideology.
In large part because of its role in shaping the Taliban's rule, the Deobandi movement is the prism through which most obervers analyze the entire Madrasah system. But there are other influential schools, and many of them are less conservative. The thousands of Barelvi madrasahs across South Asia, including Pakistan, take a broader view of heterdox Sufi traditions. Shiite madrasahs are principally designed for elementary education and leave higher study to learning centers in the Middle East. Since the 1949s, the Islamist Jammat-e- Islami – an avowedly modern Muslim organisation dedicated to combining a conservative, Islamist worldview with a commitment to education across the modern sciences – has established many schools of its own, although formally it does not support madrasahs.
To be sure, madrasahs are naturally narrow-minded institutions.Non- Muslims, particularly Jews, are regularly portrayed in a negative or hostile light and described as 'najis' (impure) or 'jahil' (ignorant). But it is wrong to blame madrasahs alone for such views: the same prejudice is prevalent in bazaars, private homes, and even government-funded schools in the Muslim world.
Critics have also focussed on the sources of funding for madrasahs – which are not tax dollars but charity and, in some case, tuition fees. Some of the charitable funding comes from overseas, especially radical Islamists in the Gulf region (although these funds have decreased of late). The largest madrasahs receive over $1.5 million a year, but many smaller ones exist of a few hundred dollars a year, more of which comes from local funding than is usually assumed. In any case, funds from extremists have only a limited influence on individual madrasahs. Even after five decades of funding, many South Asian madrasahs are run by teachers who reject Wahabbism and its various sisters. In fact, across South Asian extremists – as distinct from ultra-conservatives – actually control only a tiny portion of madrasahs.
It is also wrong to assume, as most current commentary does, that madrasahs have stood still for the past several centuries. Although they could be much more, there is plenty of innovation within the world of madrasahs. In my visits to dozens of institutions in Bangladesh, India and Pakistan, I have found English classes, a journalism-training center, and computer labs. I have met stimulating and thoughtful principals who are determined to prove the best possible education. I have also sat down with dour and insipid madrasah directors suspicious of anything that might diminish their standing in their school or the wider community. And, once or twice, I have bumped into seriously nasty radicals. (Unsurprisingly, a great deal depends of the individual running a madrasah.)
Even Darul Uloom is slowly evolving. Over the past five years, it has introduced English and computing. Some 40 pupils just over one percent of the student body – learn English. Within the Deobandi movement, there is a growing debate about madrasah reform. So far, the conservatives have dominated. But senior ulama now welcome greater contact with the outside world. "We should not be shy of media people", one told me when I was invited in July 2005. "We are not lthieves."
No Madrasah is an Island
For hundreds of years, madrasahs have changed as Muslim societies have changed. The change has always been a mixture of resisting, reacting, and innovating – just as with educational systems anywhere.
The past decade has produced fresh incentives for reform – and madrasahs are slowly responding. First, there has been a sharp rise in English-language private schools, since middle class parents want their children to have the right skills to get good jobs. The most prestigious madrasahs, such as Darul Uloom, dismiss this trend as irrelevant because it has not led to a fall in applications. But in smaller towns, the rise of private schools has already limited the ability of fee-charging to attact enough students. In some cases, this problem has stimulated broader thinking about including English- language instruction.
Innovation and reform also stem fromm a recognition that madrasah graduates are more likely to access decent tertiary education and a wider range of employment opportunities if the curriculum is widened. In India, some madrasah students are already breaking through – becoming doctors, lawyers, and software engineers. They often find that the discipline of madrasah training helps them focus on further studies, even if the educational basis they began with was narrower (but deeper) than that of many of their peers. And madrasah students themselves are keen to see reform, including the introduction of English or other local languages such as Hindi or Bengali alongside with traditional Islamic subjects.
Cynics rightly point out that reform is also being stimulated by the emphasis on missionary activity (dawa).Leading ulema are recognizing that in order to reach non-Muslims (and many Muslim besides), English is an increasingly important medium. And in order to counter other religions, more than a basic (and polemical) grounding is needed in Christianity, Hinduism, and Buddhism. These leaders are eager to ensure that the next generation of Muslim ulema can communicate in English. Generational change is also playing its part. Some of the younger innovators share a commitment to Islamic education but also want to attract brighter and able students.
Given all the media attacks on madrasahs, a backlash would not be surprising. Instead, ulama within the madrasah system are increasingly open to communicatio with the outside world. In India, leading lights of the madrasah movement have since 1995 began regularly calling for greater reaction with the media, intellectuals and government officials. And most important, no madrasah is an island. Deobandi ulema have been issued a fatwar against television, but cellular are ubiquitous in most madrasahs, Madrasah students do not live lives of seclusion. despite the intensity of the curriculum.
Sense and sensitivity
Governments have adopted two basic approaches to madrasahs: regulation and reform. The first approach involves extending or introducing government regulations, ranging from compulsory madrasah- registration schemes to curriculum reform to President Pervez Musharraf's July 2005 ruling that all foreign students must leave Pakistani madrasahs. Governments have also demanded that independent madrasahs adopt the country's regular core curriculum. Other steps have included registering students, creating an approved list of principals, imposing financial controls – or shutting down particular problem madrasahs. Reform interventions, meanwhile, seek to undercut madrasahs but improving state capacity. This usually means spending large sums of money to extend government schools into areas they previously did not reach or making state education compulsory.
Both strategies can run intto the sand. The trouble with regulatory interventions is they can easily prove excessive or even counterproductive. Registration is not unreasonable, but it has little effect other than to create lists of institutions, students and principals. Enforced curriculum reform is likely to generate a backlash. Madrasahs as a whoile are designed to transmit a religious tradition, and their independence is a core part of their identity. Many graduates from the better madrasahs resent any notion of enforced regulations, and these same graduates are often the best critics of the madrasah system, recognising its shortfalls as they go on either to run madrasahs of their own or to enter mainstream employment.
Given the scale of the challenge, reform interventions are also bound to fail. Spending more money – whether government or donor funds – on education in general is not going to displace madrasahs anytime soon. Improving the reach and effectiveness of public education will take a long time, and parents often choose madrasahs for their children even when state-provided education is available – often for the prestige of having a son studying Islam and entering an Islamic profession.
When it comes to the choice between forcing change and fostering change, India, with a Muslim population of 138 million or more, illustrates one way forward. Historically, madrasahs there have had a lot of independence, and Article 30 (i) of the Indian constitution guarantees minorities (Muslims, Sikhs and Christians) the right to establish and administer their own educational institutions. But the Indian government still has recourse if any one madrasah becomes problematic: it can invoke laws against incitement to violence if a madrasah principle advocates terrorism.
Indian educational officials have occasionally considered a more hard- line approach, especially in the late 1990s, when concerns about radicalization were abnormally high. But after careful consideration, the same officials have come to the conclusion that the best change comes from within: let madrasah speak to the madrasah, and principal to principal, so that the formers can influence the others. One initiative that has come out of this approach is a scheme to pay for English, math and science teachers in private madrasahs that choose to participate. If a madrasah principal decides to apply, he gets a fully funded teacher in one of these subjects. It also makes good sense for the madrasah (since it gets a free resource) and good sense for the government, too, as it thereby demonstrates the benefits of having this subject in addition to the traditional curriculum. In 2001, 3,500 of 6,000 madrasahs in the Indian state of Madhya Pradesh received funds for teachers of modern subjects, reaching some 175,00 students. The Indian government has also provided teacher training for madrasah teachers in Delhi.
The Indian approach is predicated on consent. It is both sensitive and sensible. India's leaders are aware of the dangers of a backlash if they intervene forefully. And unlike the thinking underlying much of the overblown press comment, the basic assumption behind the government's approach is that madrasahs play a valuable role in society, even if the education they provide is more narrow than it should be.
The invisible hand
Madrasahs do not need to be closed, contained or cut down to size. Thousands play an important social role. And the leaders of most madrasahs are willing to consider changing the way they work, although they are bound to defend what they stand for.
To be sure, there are problem madrasahs, led by extremists who preach venom. These madrasahs, may of which are Pakistani, tend to trigger provocative media coverage. But they do not dominate. Go to the largest neighbouring madrasah or a "problem" madrasah, you will find a group of tut-tutting saying, gently but insistently, that their madrasah "isn't political like that one." Problem madrasahs need to be challenged, but as individual institutions, each with its own problems that do not necessarily reflect the reality of the entire system. The particular fault lies often lies with the principal, rather than with the madrasah as a whole. And most countries have the legislation in place to proceed against the principals if they incite violence or coach potential terrorists. Passing news rules or restrictions makes little sense if the existing laws are not being applied effectively.
Of course, the most effective challenge to these problem madrasahs will come from their peers, not state intervention. Al Qaeda is as much an idea as it is a movement or an organisation, and ideas, good and bad, often work like infections. Distant regulators, disgusted officials, and worried Westerners can only do so much, but madrasah principals, graduates, graduates, and ulema wield enormous power. In short, the best debate on madrasah reform will come from within.
What is needed most is a thoughtful evidence-based approach to madrasahs. Policymakers should visit them, research them, and understand them, all the while being sure to understand that their actions could have unintended consequences. They should encourage modernisation but avoid insisting on secularisation, which would be taken as a declaration of war on Muslim education. They should seek to stimulate conversation and competition among madrasahs while allowing them their freedom. Attempting to change madrasahs through compulsion and control is unlikely to deliver positive results. Reform of the madrasah system will ultimately spurred by competition from within – and the more competition the better.
Alexander Evans works for the British Foreign and Commonwealth office. The views expressed here are his own and not those of the British government
Selamatkan Tulisan Jawi
8 MAC 2006 / 7 SAFAR 1427H
PERLU SEGERAKAN USAHA MENYELAMATKAN
TULISAN JAWI DARIPADA TERKUBUR
Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia menyambut baik saranan pelbagai pihak menghidupkan kembali Utusan Melayu. Usaha ini perlu disegerakan agar tulisan jawi tidak terus terkubur yang dikuburkan oleh orang Melayu sendiri. Majoriti daripada generasi muda kini tak dapat menguasai tulisan jawi malah ada yang tak ambil peduli langsung tulisan tersebut.
Kemahiran 3M "Membaca, Menulis dan Memahami" dalam tulisan jawi terus terhakis dari generasi ke generasi. Lambat laun tulisan ini mungkin terkubur dan hanya dikenali dalam lipatan sejarah. Tulisan jawi mengalami proses "dikuburkan" kerana massa menganggap ia kurang nilai-nilai komersial walaupun dahulu ianya adalah tulisan rasmi dalam sebarang urusan. Senario yang sama juga bakal terjadi kepada Bahasa Melayu jika tiada tindakan konkrit menanganinya.
Tanggungjawab memelihara tulisan Jawi dan Bahasa Melayu tidak semata-mata suatu tanggungjawab kepada orang Melayu tetapi sbemua bangsa yang bernaung sebagai rakyat Malaysia wajib untuk bertindak proaktif memelihara tulisan jawi dan bahasa Melayu sebagai suatu warisan milik semua. Akhbar Utusan Melayu wajar dimanfaatkan sepenuhnya di sekolah-sekolah sebagai medium pembelajaran. Pendekatan lebih kreatif perlu digunakan bagi menimbulkan minat dikalangan generasi muda. Teknologi terkini boleh dimanfaatkan seperti mewujudkan CD Interaktif dan laman web dalam tulisan jawi.
Tulisan jawi perlu diperluaskan kepada matapelajaran khusus tidak semata-mata hanya dimasukkan dalam matapelajaran Pendidikan Islam. Pertandingan-pertandingan mengasah bakat serta kemahiran yang ada hubung kait dengan tulisan jawi perlu diperluaskan dan diangkat sebagai pertandingan berprestij di peringkat negara dan nusantara.
Kita harus menghapuskan "mental block" bahawa tulisan jawi adalah semata-mata tulisan untuk unsur-unsur keagamaan sedangkan pada ketika dahulu ia digunakan dengan meluas oleh semua kaum.
Tanggungjawab memelihara tulisan Jawi dan Bahasa Melayu tidak semata-mata suatu tanggungjawab kepada orang Melayu tetapi semua bangsa yang bernaung sebagai rakyat Malaysia wajib untuk bertindak pro aktif memelihara tulisan jawi dan bahasa Melayu sebagai suatu warisan milik semua.
Akhbar Utusan Melayu wajar dimanfaatkan sepenuhnya di sekolah-sekolah sebagai medium pembelajaran. Pendekatan lebih kreatif perlu digunakan bagi menimbulkan minat dikalangan generasi muda. Teknologi terkini boleh dimanfaatkan seperti mewujudkan CD Interaktif dan laman web dalam tulisan jawi.
Tulisan jawi perlu diperluaskan kepada matapelajaran khusus tidak semata-mata hanya dimasukkan dalam matapelajaran Pendidikan Islam. Pertandingan-pertandingan mengasah bakat serta kemahiran yang ada hubung kait dengan tulisan jawi perlu diperluaskan dan diangkat sebagai pertandingan berprestij di peringkat negara dan nusantara.
Kita harus menghapuskan "mental block" bahawa tulisan jawi adalah semata-mata tulisan untuk unsur-unsur keagamaan sedangkan pada ketika dahulu ia digunakan dengan meluas oleh semua kaum. Selain itu, media cetak seperti suratkhabar utama/perdana negara dalam Bahasa Melayu (Contoh: Berita Harian dan Utusan Malaysia) mewujudkan satu muka penuh berita-berita yang ditulis dalam tulisan jawi. Pendekatan yang sama boleh diselitkan dalam akhbar bahasa Inggeris dari segi memperkenalkan kepada masyarakat tulisan tersebut. Â Justeru, ABIM berpandangan kerajaan perlu menubuhkan Majlis Tindakan Mengukuhkan Bahasa Melayu dan Tulisan Jawi yang diselanggarakan oleh Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, bertindak sebagai Sekretariat. Majlis berkenaan penting bagi mengumpulkan pandangan pelbagai pihak penyusun satu pelan tindakan jangka panjang mengukuhkan bahasa Melayu khususnya untuk semua kaum sebelum ianya mempunyai nisan dan kuburnya sendiri.
Selain itu, media cetak seperti suratkhabar utama/perdana negara dalam Bahasa Melayu (Contoh: Berita Harian dan Utusan Malaysia) mewujudkan satu muka penuh berita-berita yang ditulis dalam tulisan jawi. Pendekatan yang sama boleh diselitkan dalam akhbar bahasa Inggeris dari segi memperkenalkan kepada masyarakat tulisan tersebut.
Justeru, ABIM berpandangan kerajaan perlu menubuhkan Majlis Tindakan Mengukuhkan Bahasa Melayu dan Tulisan Jawi yang diselanggarakan oleh Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, bertindak sebagai Sekretariat. Majlis berkenaan penting bagi mengumpulkan pandangan pelbagai pihak penyusun satu pelan tindakan jangka panjang mengukuhkan bahasa Melayu khususnya untuk semua kaum sebelum ianya mempunyai nisan dan kuburnya sendiri.
KHAIRUL ARIFIN MOHD MUNIR
Setiausaha Agung
Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (ABIM)
PERLU SEGERAKAN USAHA MENYELAMATKAN
TULISAN JAWI DARIPADA TERKUBUR
Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia menyambut baik saranan pelbagai pihak menghidupkan kembali Utusan Melayu. Usaha ini perlu disegerakan agar tulisan jawi tidak terus terkubur yang dikuburkan oleh orang Melayu sendiri. Majoriti daripada generasi muda kini tak dapat menguasai tulisan jawi malah ada yang tak ambil peduli langsung tulisan tersebut.
Kemahiran 3M "Membaca, Menulis dan Memahami" dalam tulisan jawi terus terhakis dari generasi ke generasi. Lambat laun tulisan ini mungkin terkubur dan hanya dikenali dalam lipatan sejarah. Tulisan jawi mengalami proses "dikuburkan" kerana massa menganggap ia kurang nilai-nilai komersial walaupun dahulu ianya adalah tulisan rasmi dalam sebarang urusan. Senario yang sama juga bakal terjadi kepada Bahasa Melayu jika tiada tindakan konkrit menanganinya.
Tanggungjawab memelihara tulisan Jawi dan Bahasa Melayu tidak semata-mata suatu tanggungjawab kepada orang Melayu tetapi sbemua bangsa yang bernaung sebagai rakyat Malaysia wajib untuk bertindak proaktif memelihara tulisan jawi dan bahasa Melayu sebagai suatu warisan milik semua. Akhbar Utusan Melayu wajar dimanfaatkan sepenuhnya di sekolah-sekolah sebagai medium pembelajaran. Pendekatan lebih kreatif perlu digunakan bagi menimbulkan minat dikalangan generasi muda. Teknologi terkini boleh dimanfaatkan seperti mewujudkan CD Interaktif dan laman web dalam tulisan jawi.
Tulisan jawi perlu diperluaskan kepada matapelajaran khusus tidak semata-mata hanya dimasukkan dalam matapelajaran Pendidikan Islam. Pertandingan-pertandingan mengasah bakat serta kemahiran yang ada hubung kait dengan tulisan jawi perlu diperluaskan dan diangkat sebagai pertandingan berprestij di peringkat negara dan nusantara.
Kita harus menghapuskan "mental block" bahawa tulisan jawi adalah semata-mata tulisan untuk unsur-unsur keagamaan sedangkan pada ketika dahulu ia digunakan dengan meluas oleh semua kaum.
Tanggungjawab memelihara tulisan Jawi dan Bahasa Melayu tidak semata-mata suatu tanggungjawab kepada orang Melayu tetapi semua bangsa yang bernaung sebagai rakyat Malaysia wajib untuk bertindak pro aktif memelihara tulisan jawi dan bahasa Melayu sebagai suatu warisan milik semua.
Akhbar Utusan Melayu wajar dimanfaatkan sepenuhnya di sekolah-sekolah sebagai medium pembelajaran. Pendekatan lebih kreatif perlu digunakan bagi menimbulkan minat dikalangan generasi muda. Teknologi terkini boleh dimanfaatkan seperti mewujudkan CD Interaktif dan laman web dalam tulisan jawi.
Tulisan jawi perlu diperluaskan kepada matapelajaran khusus tidak semata-mata hanya dimasukkan dalam matapelajaran Pendidikan Islam. Pertandingan-pertandingan mengasah bakat serta kemahiran yang ada hubung kait dengan tulisan jawi perlu diperluaskan dan diangkat sebagai pertandingan berprestij di peringkat negara dan nusantara.
Kita harus menghapuskan "mental block" bahawa tulisan jawi adalah semata-mata tulisan untuk unsur-unsur keagamaan sedangkan pada ketika dahulu ia digunakan dengan meluas oleh semua kaum. Selain itu, media cetak seperti suratkhabar utama/perdana negara dalam Bahasa Melayu (Contoh: Berita Harian dan Utusan Malaysia) mewujudkan satu muka penuh berita-berita yang ditulis dalam tulisan jawi. Pendekatan yang sama boleh diselitkan dalam akhbar bahasa Inggeris dari segi memperkenalkan kepada masyarakat tulisan tersebut. Â Justeru, ABIM berpandangan kerajaan perlu menubuhkan Majlis Tindakan Mengukuhkan Bahasa Melayu dan Tulisan Jawi yang diselanggarakan oleh Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, bertindak sebagai Sekretariat. Majlis berkenaan penting bagi mengumpulkan pandangan pelbagai pihak penyusun satu pelan tindakan jangka panjang mengukuhkan bahasa Melayu khususnya untuk semua kaum sebelum ianya mempunyai nisan dan kuburnya sendiri.
Selain itu, media cetak seperti suratkhabar utama/perdana negara dalam Bahasa Melayu (Contoh: Berita Harian dan Utusan Malaysia) mewujudkan satu muka penuh berita-berita yang ditulis dalam tulisan jawi. Pendekatan yang sama boleh diselitkan dalam akhbar bahasa Inggeris dari segi memperkenalkan kepada masyarakat tulisan tersebut.
Justeru, ABIM berpandangan kerajaan perlu menubuhkan Majlis Tindakan Mengukuhkan Bahasa Melayu dan Tulisan Jawi yang diselanggarakan oleh Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, bertindak sebagai Sekretariat. Majlis berkenaan penting bagi mengumpulkan pandangan pelbagai pihak penyusun satu pelan tindakan jangka panjang mengukuhkan bahasa Melayu khususnya untuk semua kaum sebelum ianya mempunyai nisan dan kuburnya sendiri.
KHAIRUL ARIFIN MOHD MUNIR
Setiausaha Agung
Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (ABIM)
Protes ditubuhkan untuk bantah kenaikan harga minyak
Protes ditubuhkan untuk bantah kenaikan harga minyak
Mar 08, 06
Zulkifli Sulong dan Roy Rasul
KUALA LUMPUR, 8 Mac (Hrkh) - Sebuah badan yang dinamakan Gabungan Protes Kenaikan Harga Minyak (Protes) ditubuhkan oleh parti politik pembangkang dan badan bukan kerajaan (NGO) semalam bagi menyusun aktiviti kempen membantah kenaikan harga minyak 30 sen oleh kerajaan baru-baru ini.
Timbalan Presiden PAS, Nasharudin Mat Isa telah dipilih sebagai jurucakap badan itu dalam mesyuarat pertama mereka semalam.
"Kita akan kumpulkan sebanyak mungkin pertubuhan untuk bersama-sama dalam kempen kita ini sehingga harga minyak diturunkan semula," kata Nasharudin kepada Harakahdaily.
"Slogan kita adalah Protes Sehingga Turun," kata beliau lagi tanpa menjelaskan maksud turun itu turun harga minyak atau Perdana Menteri yang turun.
Projek pertama Protes adalah mengadakan demonstrasi aman kedua di perkarangan KLCC bagi menyatakan bantahan terhadap kenaikan harga minyak yang sangat tidak wajar ini.
"Kita sedang berusaha untuk kumpulkan lebih ramai penyokong yang akan turun dalam demo aman yang akan buat Jumaat ini. Kita harap 10,000 hingga 15,000 akan turun dari seluruh negara Jumaat ini," kata Nasharudin dalam sidang media khas hari ini.
Ketika ditanya, apa rasionalnya lebih ramai akan turun kali ini, Nasharudin berkata, perhimpunan Jumaat lepas diadakan seluruh negara sedangkan kali ini hanya dua sahaja iaitu di Kuala Terengganu dan KLCC.
Jumaat lalu, perhimpunan bantahan telah berjalan di Kota Bharu, Johor Bharu, Pulau Pinang, Alor Setar dan beberapa tempat lagi.
Ketika ditanya, apakah respon PAS terhadap kenyataan pemimpin kerajaan kononnya para peniaga yang menaikkan harga barangan ekoran kenaikan harga minyak sebagai pengkhianat, Nasharudin berkata, "Pengkhianat rakyat sebenarnya adalah kerajaan kerana kerajaan BN yang menaikkan dulu harga minyak yang menyebabkan harga barangan lain terpaksa dinaikkan untuk menampung kos baru yang dikenakan ekoran kenaikan harga minyak."
Peranan media
Katanya, beliau kesal dengan peranan media yang tidak memberi tempat yang sewajarnya di atas kenaikan harga runcit minyak sebanyak 30 sen sejak 28 Februari.
Katanya, ini kerana rakyat hanya tahu di sebelah! pihak sedangkan pandangan orang ramai tidak didedahkan.
Menurutnya, pihaknya akan menuntut supaya subsidi asal dikekalkan, harga minyak diturun dan jaminan supaya kerajaan tidak menaikkan tarif utiliti api dan air.
“Jika tuntutan ini tidak berlaku maka kita akan teruskan bantahan iaitu ‘protes sampai turun’ ” katanya.
Katanya mereka akan mengajak mendesak kerajaan menarik balik kenaikan itu dan juga akan meneruskan program pengedaran risalah sama ada di peringkat nasional ataupun negeri.
Sementara itu, Bendahari PAS Pusat Dr Hatta Ramli yang turut sama dalam sidang media tersebut berkata, demo tersebut bukan terhadap kepada parti pembangkang ataupun NGO malah Umno pun dialu-alukan.
Naikkan harga teh tarik
Kenyataan Perdana Menteri, Dato' Seri Abdullah yang terkejut dengan kenaikan harga teh tarik ekoran kenaikan harga minyak dibidas oleh Bendahari PAS, Dr Hatta Ra! mli yang turut serta dalam sidang media oleh Nasharudin itu.
"Benarlah hujjah Abdullah itu kalau teh tarik menggunakan air sejuk dari paip sahaja tetapi teh tarik perlu dipanaskan dengan menggunakan gas yang telah dinaikkan harganya oleh kerajaan," kata Hatta.
Berhubung dengan polis yang tidak bertindak ganas dalam perhimpunan Jumaat lalu, Nasharudin mengucapkan terima kasih kepada polis yang disifatkan beliau sebagai menjalankan tugas secara profesional.
"Polis bertugas untuk menjaga keamanan. Jadi majlis itu tidak ada kekerasan dan kekecohan kerana polis bertindak berdasarkan fungsinya menjaga keamanan. Kita harap polis kekalkan profesionalismenya," kata beliau.
Pertemuan dengan PM
Sementara itu, sehingga kini PAS tidak menerima sebarang pelawaan atau panggilan dari ! Jabatan Perdana Menteri walaupun PAS sudah menyatakan kesediaannya untuk bertemu PM selepas PM menyatakan kesediaannya untuk bertemu PAS berikutan isu kenaikan harga minyak.
Nasharudin berkata, beliau telah membuat kenyataan semalam menyatakan kesediaan itu ekoran kesediaan Abdullah untuk bertemu PAS.
"Namun sehingga kini, tidak ada sebarang surat atau panggilan dari pejabat PM," kata beliau.
Sebelum ini, katanya, PAS telah tiga kali menghantar surat untuk bertemu PM tetapi tidak ada satupun yang dijawab PM.
Cadangan sakitkan hati rakyat
Berhubung cadangan dari Perdana Menteri agar rakyat berjimat dan melakukan kerja tambahan, Dr Hatta pula berkata, memang perkara itu telah dibuat oleh rakyat.
"Ramai kakitangan kerajaan sudah melakukan dua kerja dalam satu hari untuk menampung kehidupan mereka yang perit. Ada pegawai yang bawa teksi pada waktu malam selepas bekerja di pejabat kerajaan pada waktu siangnya.
"Mereka dah buat sebelum ini untuk hidup. Sebab itu saya katakan cadangan pemimpin Umno itu menyakitkan hati rakyat sahaja," katanya.
BN juga bantah
Nasharuddin pula menambah penentangan kenaikan harga minyak bukan saja di pihak pembangkang tetapi komponen Barisan Nasional pun diyakini tidak bersetuju.
“Kalau tidak takkan Perdana Menteri Dato’ Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi membuat taklimat kepada ahlinya baru-baru ini, dan ini menunjukkan adanya bangkangan, malah bukan orang PAS saja yang membeli minyak ataupun mengguna gas orang Umno pun guna juga. Lainlah jika mereka masak dengan kayu api,” katanya lagi.
Mar 08, 06
Zulkifli Sulong dan Roy Rasul
KUALA LUMPUR, 8 Mac (Hrkh) - Sebuah badan yang dinamakan Gabungan Protes Kenaikan Harga Minyak (Protes) ditubuhkan oleh parti politik pembangkang dan badan bukan kerajaan (NGO) semalam bagi menyusun aktiviti kempen membantah kenaikan harga minyak 30 sen oleh kerajaan baru-baru ini.
Timbalan Presiden PAS, Nasharudin Mat Isa telah dipilih sebagai jurucakap badan itu dalam mesyuarat pertama mereka semalam.
"Kita akan kumpulkan sebanyak mungkin pertubuhan untuk bersama-sama dalam kempen kita ini sehingga harga minyak diturunkan semula," kata Nasharudin kepada Harakahdaily.
"Slogan kita adalah Protes Sehingga Turun," kata beliau lagi tanpa menjelaskan maksud turun itu turun harga minyak atau Perdana Menteri yang turun.
Projek pertama Protes adalah mengadakan demonstrasi aman kedua di perkarangan KLCC bagi menyatakan bantahan terhadap kenaikan harga minyak yang sangat tidak wajar ini.
"Kita sedang berusaha untuk kumpulkan lebih ramai penyokong yang akan turun dalam demo aman yang akan buat Jumaat ini. Kita harap 10,000 hingga 15,000 akan turun dari seluruh negara Jumaat ini," kata Nasharudin dalam sidang media khas hari ini.
Ketika ditanya, apa rasionalnya lebih ramai akan turun kali ini, Nasharudin berkata, perhimpunan Jumaat lepas diadakan seluruh negara sedangkan kali ini hanya dua sahaja iaitu di Kuala Terengganu dan KLCC.
Jumaat lalu, perhimpunan bantahan telah berjalan di Kota Bharu, Johor Bharu, Pulau Pinang, Alor Setar dan beberapa tempat lagi.
Ketika ditanya, apakah respon PAS terhadap kenyataan pemimpin kerajaan kononnya para peniaga yang menaikkan harga barangan ekoran kenaikan harga minyak sebagai pengkhianat, Nasharudin berkata, "Pengkhianat rakyat sebenarnya adalah kerajaan kerana kerajaan BN yang menaikkan dulu harga minyak yang menyebabkan harga barangan lain terpaksa dinaikkan untuk menampung kos baru yang dikenakan ekoran kenaikan harga minyak."
Peranan media
Katanya, beliau kesal dengan peranan media yang tidak memberi tempat yang sewajarnya di atas kenaikan harga runcit minyak sebanyak 30 sen sejak 28 Februari.
Katanya, ini kerana rakyat hanya tahu di sebelah! pihak sedangkan pandangan orang ramai tidak didedahkan.
Menurutnya, pihaknya akan menuntut supaya subsidi asal dikekalkan, harga minyak diturun dan jaminan supaya kerajaan tidak menaikkan tarif utiliti api dan air.
“Jika tuntutan ini tidak berlaku maka kita akan teruskan bantahan iaitu ‘protes sampai turun’ ” katanya.
Katanya mereka akan mengajak mendesak kerajaan menarik balik kenaikan itu dan juga akan meneruskan program pengedaran risalah sama ada di peringkat nasional ataupun negeri.
Sementara itu, Bendahari PAS Pusat Dr Hatta Ramli yang turut sama dalam sidang media tersebut berkata, demo tersebut bukan terhadap kepada parti pembangkang ataupun NGO malah Umno pun dialu-alukan.
Naikkan harga teh tarik
Kenyataan Perdana Menteri, Dato' Seri Abdullah yang terkejut dengan kenaikan harga teh tarik ekoran kenaikan harga minyak dibidas oleh Bendahari PAS, Dr Hatta Ra! mli yang turut serta dalam sidang media oleh Nasharudin itu.
"Benarlah hujjah Abdullah itu kalau teh tarik menggunakan air sejuk dari paip sahaja tetapi teh tarik perlu dipanaskan dengan menggunakan gas yang telah dinaikkan harganya oleh kerajaan," kata Hatta.
Berhubung dengan polis yang tidak bertindak ganas dalam perhimpunan Jumaat lalu, Nasharudin mengucapkan terima kasih kepada polis yang disifatkan beliau sebagai menjalankan tugas secara profesional.
"Polis bertugas untuk menjaga keamanan. Jadi majlis itu tidak ada kekerasan dan kekecohan kerana polis bertindak berdasarkan fungsinya menjaga keamanan. Kita harap polis kekalkan profesionalismenya," kata beliau.
Pertemuan dengan PM
Sementara itu, sehingga kini PAS tidak menerima sebarang pelawaan atau panggilan dari ! Jabatan Perdana Menteri walaupun PAS sudah menyatakan kesediaannya untuk bertemu PM selepas PM menyatakan kesediaannya untuk bertemu PAS berikutan isu kenaikan harga minyak.
Nasharudin berkata, beliau telah membuat kenyataan semalam menyatakan kesediaan itu ekoran kesediaan Abdullah untuk bertemu PAS.
"Namun sehingga kini, tidak ada sebarang surat atau panggilan dari pejabat PM," kata beliau.
Sebelum ini, katanya, PAS telah tiga kali menghantar surat untuk bertemu PM tetapi tidak ada satupun yang dijawab PM.
Cadangan sakitkan hati rakyat
Berhubung cadangan dari Perdana Menteri agar rakyat berjimat dan melakukan kerja tambahan, Dr Hatta pula berkata, memang perkara itu telah dibuat oleh rakyat.
"Ramai kakitangan kerajaan sudah melakukan dua kerja dalam satu hari untuk menampung kehidupan mereka yang perit. Ada pegawai yang bawa teksi pada waktu malam selepas bekerja di pejabat kerajaan pada waktu siangnya.
"Mereka dah buat sebelum ini untuk hidup. Sebab itu saya katakan cadangan pemimpin Umno itu menyakitkan hati rakyat sahaja," katanya.
BN juga bantah
Nasharuddin pula menambah penentangan kenaikan harga minyak bukan saja di pihak pembangkang tetapi komponen Barisan Nasional pun diyakini tidak bersetuju.
“Kalau tidak takkan Perdana Menteri Dato’ Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi membuat taklimat kepada ahlinya baru-baru ini, dan ini menunjukkan adanya bangkangan, malah bukan orang PAS saja yang membeli minyak ataupun mengguna gas orang Umno pun guna juga. Lainlah jika mereka masak dengan kayu api,” katanya lagi.
Fuel Hike - Of PM's Economic Sense and Nonsense
Fuel Hike - Of PM's Economic Sense and Nonsense
Mar 08, 06
Dr Dzulkifli Ahmad, PAS Research Centre.
It has been more than 2 years since PM Abdullah ascended to power. Admittedly, he won the election in grace, superseding the performance of his immediate predecessor. But the accolades have disappeared. After much has happened and not happened, patience is fast running out.
Oblivious of his lacklustre showing and still remorseless, he decided to further stress the endurance of this nation. The unanticipated announcement of the 30 sen hike in! petrol, diesel and LPG prices descended like a calamity. No longer amused by the premier’s ineptness of mastering the context of things, the rakyat is understandably enraged and disgusted.
Does the PM have what it takes to turnaround the problems confronting the nation? Is he really willing to bite the bullet, on all the ‘sins of omissions and commissions’ of his immediate predecessor, of which he was a party to it? Given the constraint of space, I may only enumerate briefly.
Granted an already burdened rakyat with the recent overall rise in the cost of living, the timing of the fuel hike could not be worse. The PM need not be told that inflation spiked to 3.7% in August from 3%, when the government raised fuel prices in July 2005.
Research Investment of Financial Institutions, like CIMB, are estimating that Consumer Price Index (CPI) growth is expected to perk up to 4.0% in March. A strong increase is expected in the su! b-group of transport and communication which makes up 21% of the CPI basket.
Any reprimand or threat to business people about to take advantage of the hike, will only fall on deaf ears. The manufacturers or the retailers may be cajoled or suppressed for now, under the enforcement’s watchful eyes. But they will have to eventually pass on the cost to the consumers; both the direct and indirect cost. And who will take the greatest brunt of it? Of course the poor and the lower-income group, as it is across the board.
So the first impact of fuel hike is on inflation and that means a higher cost of living, digging into their pockets deeper. It involves literally everything from teh-tarik, roti-canai, mee-mamak, children’s bus-fare right up to our necessary-evil’s flight-fare. Hypocritical sermon preaching thrifty and prudence in spending and belt-tightening are certainly not for the poor and the lower-incom! e groups. It is only appropriate for the middle and upper-middle class, needless to say of the too-many Cabinet Ministers who are quite notorious, as alleged by responsible people, for making exorbitant claims every time they make a move, all in the name of ‘service to the rakyat’.
Inflation is arguably difficult to control, the source of which is largely due to external inflation either in the form of imported inflation or from the reduction of ringgit’s value as seen in the last financial crisis. In the current context, the threat is from escalating global oil prices. Having upped the prices of fuel from 18.5% to 23% in this latest round of madness, there are hardly any effective avenues to curb price escalation. You seriously wonder the wisdom or more of the lack of it, in choosing such foolishly audacious option, notwithstanding the concomitant interest rate hike (BLR and OPR) that will be put in place by the Central Bank to curb the inflationary pressure. The entire ! cascade of knock-on effects on the economy will be induced including purchasing power and consumption, demand and supply side macro economy, employment etc.
Compared to the saving in July of RM 2.2 billions, the saving due to this increase is estimated to be about RM4.4 billions, assuming the global price of crude oil remains stable. It looks like a lot of revenue lost in subsidy. But that is not the whole truth, as the country is a net exporter of oil and since it owns 100% of the national oil corporation, Petronas, there is always a net benefit, in terms of revenue to the government whenever oil price increases and ringgit strengthens against the dollar, as it is now.
The government’s arguments that the saving will be diverted to development projects namely the public transport system is atrocious. The public saw the rape of billions of ringgit by cronies, in getting the present dismal public transport systems in place, viz; the Putra and Star LRT, The Monorail, Intrakota etc. How much more will be spent and how does the entire rakyat benefit, if it is only in Kuala Lumpur and the Klang Valley?
How do we know of other sinister agendas up their sleeves? Are they intending to turnaround the beleaguered national airline, MAS by injecting RM 2 billions from saving of the fuel hike or of the construction of new lines by Star and Putra LRT now taken over by Syarikat Prasarana Negara Bhd (SPNB), a holding company under MOF Inc. We are reminded that government had taken over from Renong’s Putra asset and debts amounting to RM 4.2 billion in 2002. The Putra LRT, just to remind everyone cost us a whooping RM 5.2 billions stretching for 29 km from Taman Melawati to Kelana Jaya. What’s coming next? God knows!
.
How the Petronas’ contribution to the tune of RM500 billion, was spent by the government for the last 30 years is still shrouded in ambiguity. The civil society and indeed the entire rakyat are now demanding that transparency and accountability must prevail in Petronas. Billions of ringgit has been used by the government to bail out cronies and financing mega-projects that are fast turning into white elephants and now a great liability by way of maintaining costs.
Subsidy may or may not be perpetual, as it is arguably causing market distortion in the actual prices of our products. However, the government must place the interest of the nation and the rakyat top most in their priority list. Determining subsidies and taxation are fiscal policy of any government on earth. That is routine. The macro and micro aspect of managing national economy are surely more complicated and daunting than ever before. The rakyat remains at pain to be in grasped with the sense perhaps nonsense, of the current economic policy. Granted that the former massive ‘prime-priming’ effort of h! is predecessor is evidently abhorred, the PM however remains confused with his ways and delays in doing things are sending wrong signals resulting in a flagging economy and lackluster performance including the KL’s Bourse.
Be that as it may, the fact remains that efforts at ‘wealth-creation’ and subsequently at ‘wealth-redistribution’ must also be given a level-playing field, so as to encourage Malaysian industries, corporations and entrepreneurs to be genuinely viable much as it has to be locally and globally competitive. There must be an immediate end to all rent-seeking activities of cronies and cronyism-bordering-corruption. The government is in urgent need of putting good governance and best practice. It will go a long way to save billions of ringgit. It is time that there be less talk and to now walk the talk, Right Honourable PM and DPM!
Let it be known to all and sundry, that while we pride ourselves of reducing hard-chore poverty, as a nation, ! our income disparity between the have and have-nots are amongst the most despicable in the region. The fuel-hike is a sure formula to exacerbate this phenomenon.
Thanks to the voters who put the current regime under PM Abdullah Ahmad Badawi!
Mar 08, 06
Dr Dzulkifli Ahmad, PAS Research Centre.
It has been more than 2 years since PM Abdullah ascended to power. Admittedly, he won the election in grace, superseding the performance of his immediate predecessor. But the accolades have disappeared. After much has happened and not happened, patience is fast running out.
Oblivious of his lacklustre showing and still remorseless, he decided to further stress the endurance of this nation. The unanticipated announcement of the 30 sen hike in! petrol, diesel and LPG prices descended like a calamity. No longer amused by the premier’s ineptness of mastering the context of things, the rakyat is understandably enraged and disgusted.
Does the PM have what it takes to turnaround the problems confronting the nation? Is he really willing to bite the bullet, on all the ‘sins of omissions and commissions’ of his immediate predecessor, of which he was a party to it? Given the constraint of space, I may only enumerate briefly.
Granted an already burdened rakyat with the recent overall rise in the cost of living, the timing of the fuel hike could not be worse. The PM need not be told that inflation spiked to 3.7% in August from 3%, when the government raised fuel prices in July 2005.
Research Investment of Financial Institutions, like CIMB, are estimating that Consumer Price Index (CPI) growth is expected to perk up to 4.0% in March. A strong increase is expected in the su! b-group of transport and communication which makes up 21% of the CPI basket.
Any reprimand or threat to business people about to take advantage of the hike, will only fall on deaf ears. The manufacturers or the retailers may be cajoled or suppressed for now, under the enforcement’s watchful eyes. But they will have to eventually pass on the cost to the consumers; both the direct and indirect cost. And who will take the greatest brunt of it? Of course the poor and the lower-income group, as it is across the board.
So the first impact of fuel hike is on inflation and that means a higher cost of living, digging into their pockets deeper. It involves literally everything from teh-tarik, roti-canai, mee-mamak, children’s bus-fare right up to our necessary-evil’s flight-fare. Hypocritical sermon preaching thrifty and prudence in spending and belt-tightening are certainly not for the poor and the lower-incom! e groups. It is only appropriate for the middle and upper-middle class, needless to say of the too-many Cabinet Ministers who are quite notorious, as alleged by responsible people, for making exorbitant claims every time they make a move, all in the name of ‘service to the rakyat’.
Inflation is arguably difficult to control, the source of which is largely due to external inflation either in the form of imported inflation or from the reduction of ringgit’s value as seen in the last financial crisis. In the current context, the threat is from escalating global oil prices. Having upped the prices of fuel from 18.5% to 23% in this latest round of madness, there are hardly any effective avenues to curb price escalation. You seriously wonder the wisdom or more of the lack of it, in choosing such foolishly audacious option, notwithstanding the concomitant interest rate hike (BLR and OPR) that will be put in place by the Central Bank to curb the inflationary pressure. The entire ! cascade of knock-on effects on the economy will be induced including purchasing power and consumption, demand and supply side macro economy, employment etc.
Compared to the saving in July of RM 2.2 billions, the saving due to this increase is estimated to be about RM4.4 billions, assuming the global price of crude oil remains stable. It looks like a lot of revenue lost in subsidy. But that is not the whole truth, as the country is a net exporter of oil and since it owns 100% of the national oil corporation, Petronas, there is always a net benefit, in terms of revenue to the government whenever oil price increases and ringgit strengthens against the dollar, as it is now.
The government’s arguments that the saving will be diverted to development projects namely the public transport system is atrocious. The public saw the rape of billions of ringgit by cronies, in getting the present dismal public transport systems in place, viz; the Putra and Star LRT, The Monorail, Intrakota etc. How much more will be spent and how does the entire rakyat benefit, if it is only in Kuala Lumpur and the Klang Valley?
How do we know of other sinister agendas up their sleeves? Are they intending to turnaround the beleaguered national airline, MAS by injecting RM 2 billions from saving of the fuel hike or of the construction of new lines by Star and Putra LRT now taken over by Syarikat Prasarana Negara Bhd (SPNB), a holding company under MOF Inc. We are reminded that government had taken over from Renong’s Putra asset and debts amounting to RM 4.2 billion in 2002. The Putra LRT, just to remind everyone cost us a whooping RM 5.2 billions stretching for 29 km from Taman Melawati to Kelana Jaya. What’s coming next? God knows!
.
How the Petronas’ contribution to the tune of RM500 billion, was spent by the government for the last 30 years is still shrouded in ambiguity. The civil society and indeed the entire rakyat are now demanding that transparency and accountability must prevail in Petronas. Billions of ringgit has been used by the government to bail out cronies and financing mega-projects that are fast turning into white elephants and now a great liability by way of maintaining costs.
Subsidy may or may not be perpetual, as it is arguably causing market distortion in the actual prices of our products. However, the government must place the interest of the nation and the rakyat top most in their priority list. Determining subsidies and taxation are fiscal policy of any government on earth. That is routine. The macro and micro aspect of managing national economy are surely more complicated and daunting than ever before. The rakyat remains at pain to be in grasped with the sense perhaps nonsense, of the current economic policy. Granted that the former massive ‘prime-priming’ effort of h! is predecessor is evidently abhorred, the PM however remains confused with his ways and delays in doing things are sending wrong signals resulting in a flagging economy and lackluster performance including the KL’s Bourse.
Be that as it may, the fact remains that efforts at ‘wealth-creation’ and subsequently at ‘wealth-redistribution’ must also be given a level-playing field, so as to encourage Malaysian industries, corporations and entrepreneurs to be genuinely viable much as it has to be locally and globally competitive. There must be an immediate end to all rent-seeking activities of cronies and cronyism-bordering-corruption. The government is in urgent need of putting good governance and best practice. It will go a long way to save billions of ringgit. It is time that there be less talk and to now walk the talk, Right Honourable PM and DPM!
Let it be known to all and sundry, that while we pride ourselves of reducing hard-chore poverty, as a nation, ! our income disparity between the have and have-nots are amongst the most despicable in the region. The fuel-hike is a sure formula to exacerbate this phenomenon.
Thanks to the voters who put the current regime under PM Abdullah Ahmad Badawi!
The Islamic world’s United Nations
Open Democracy
07 March 2006
The Islamic world’s United Nations
Ehsan Masood
7 - 3 - 2006
The Organisation of the Islamic Conference is seeking to re-equip itself to play an active, engaged role in the global political arena. Ehsan Masood assesses the challenge facing the OIC's secretary- general, Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu.
On 17 February, an imam at a mosque in Peshawar, northern Pakistan, offered a $1 million bounty to anyone who would kill one of the Danish cartoonists who had caricatured the Prophet Mohammed in the pages of the newspaper Jyllands-Posten.
Maulana Yousef Qureshi's call could not have come at a worse time. Across the Muslim world, the cartoons controversy had reached a peak. Several cities in Pakistan had seen demonstrations that ended in violence. Now the capital Islamabad, a small city surrounded by hills and dominated by the business of government and diplomacy, was feeling the pressure. The leadership of Islamist political parties wanted to lead a protest march into the capital, but were being prevented from doing so because they were refusing to guarantee that the demonstrations would remain peaceful.
I was flying into Islamabad to attend a meeting of science ministers of Muslim states. As my plane prepared to land, roads into the capital were closed to traffic. Schools and businesses in the adjacent city of Rawalpindi were also shut and police dressed in riot- gear lined part of the drive from the airport to the city centre. For the next twenty-four hours we held our breath.
The fact that the next few days passed off without incident may have had something to do with the presence in Islamabad of Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, the Turkish secretary-general of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC). The OIC, founded in 1969 and based in Saudi Arabia's port-city of Jeddah, represents fifty-seven predominantly Muslim countries and is the largest intergovernmental organisation outside the United Nations system.
A testIt was one of the biggest tests Ihsanoglu had faced since being elected to lead the OIC in June 2004. At a press conference in Islamabad on 21 February, he said the cartoons controversy had everything to do with respecting the feelings of religious minorities. It was not about freedom of speech, about which "there are no two opinions". Responding to a question on the bounty, Ihsanoglu angrily said: "We have no authority to kill anybody and take the law in our hands." Ihsanoglu was emphatic: "Such a fatwa goes against Islam."
His comments were widely reported in Pakistan's press and may have helped to release some of the tension. Ihsanoglu is respected across the Muslim world. In Pakistan (as elsewhere) Islamists cannot criticise him in the same way they routinely do President Pervez Musharraf. This is partly because he represents the consensus (and the conscience) of the Muslim world.
But there is a more practical, immediate reason: it was the OIC's December 2005 summit in Mecca – where the notorious "expanded" dossier of cartoons produced by Danish imams seeking to mobilise Muslim anger was circulated – that helped to alert Muslims to the images' existence. The OIC's vigorous condemnation of the "desecration" and its concern over the "rising hatred of Muslims" in Europe follows its decision to establish what it calls an "Islamophobia Observatory" in Jeddah, with a brief to document and publicise prejudice against Muslims in countries where they are a minority of the population.
Such initiatives have helped raise the OIC's profile – and not just among Muslims. Ihsanoglu is much in demand in the capitals of Europe. In the past few months his office in Jeddah has hosted high-profile visitors, including United Nations secretary-general Kofi Annan; those in regular contact include European Union foreign-policy chief Javier Solana and British foreign secretary Jack Straw.
This week Ihsanoglu comes to Britain, a rare destination for an OIC chief. In addition to meetings with Muslim community groups and at the foreign office, he will speak at the opening of 1001 Inventions, a new exhibition at the Manchester Science Museum on the contribution of Arabs and Muslims to modern life.
Ihsanoglu says that one of the themes he wants to talk about is Islamophobia and how it can be combatted. OIC countries want him to look into the possibility of a resolution in the European parliament on Islamophobia as well as a new code of ethics for the media. At the same time he also wants to talk about reforms in the OIC, the most ambitious in its thirty-seven-year history.
The Organisation of the Islamic Conference came into existence after a conference of heads of state of Muslim countries in Rabat, Morocco. The meeting had been called by Muslim states to coordinate a boycott of Israel following an arson attack on the al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem (on this incident – a neglected precursor of the Salman Rushdie and Danish cartoon affairs – see Fred Halliday's openDemocracy article, "Blasphemy and power", February 2006).
The fledgling organisation quickly grew into a complex network of specialised agencies each aimed at strengthening bonds between Muslim states. These agencies include the Islamic Development Bank in Saudi Arabia, Comstech (itself based in Islamabad, which promotes scientific cooperation), a network of universities, and an OIC-wide news agency.
A time to make wavesThe institutional architecture may look impressive, but the way the OIC is run reflects the democratic deficit in many Muslim countries. For example, its highest decision-making body calls itself the "Conference of Kings and Heads of State and Government". Until recently, its workings were opaque to the outside world (even to citizens of Muslim states). There are few opportunities for non- government groups (such as charities, trade unions, professional societies or business) to participate in its decisions. Only five new countries have been given observer status (Russia was admitted in 2005; India is being discussed), and the OIC has little contact or cooperation with other organisations in the global community, such as agencies attached to the UN.
This very absence of engagement and connection has meant that inside the OIC, pressures for change have been incubating for some time. In 2004, several of the OIC's more influential players (including Malaysia, Pakistan and Turkey) supported the candidacy of Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu as a figure who would implement reforms of the organisation to make it more outward-looking.
The choice was a smart one. Ihsanoglu is not a diplomat in the usual sense, but a historian (specialising in the transfer of technology from Europe to the Ottoman empire) and a former president of the International Union for the History and Philosophy of Science. At the same time he is an OIC-insider having headed the OIC-affiliated centre for research in Islamic art and culture (Ircica), which is based in Turkey. This profile makes him ideally placed to play a less bureaucratic and more outspoken role than his predecessors.
Ihsanoglu is also assuming the leadership of the IOC at an opportune time, when significant reform of the organisation is already on its agenda. The Mecca summit in December – an extraordinary gathering of OIC heads of state – agreed to support most of the recommendation of a commission of experts charged with envisioning the IOC's renewal. There, a ten-year action plan was signed and it was agreed that the organisation needs a complete internal overhaul: a new charter, a new name, more staff, and even a new building.
The action plan is an impressive document. It promises an organisation that will uphold transparency and accountability in governance and protect the rights of women, children and minorities. It promises to promote sustainable development and to assist the least developed states in tackling diseases such as Aids, malaria and tuberculosis (twenty-seven OIC member-states are African). It also pledges to work more closely with international agencies and with existing development initiatives such as the New Partnership for Africa's Development (Nepad) and the UN's Millennium Development Goals.
The action plan also promises concrete steps on theological issues, for example confronting ideologies that claim to be able to use Islamic rulings to justify extremism. Meanwhile, Ihsanoglu has opened up the Jeddah secretariat to the outside world. We know this because the OIC website contains details of where he goes, who he meets, even names of people that he speaks with on the phone.
A turning-point?All of this represents genuine progress. For a predominantly Muslim body to acknowledge good governance, rights for children, the threat from Aids is welcome evidence of fresh, innovative thinking. Some of the OIC's specialist development agencies (such as Comstech) have already started to coordinate what they do with other specialised agencies outside of the OIC system.
Yet some of the text in the OIC's reform package seems unchanged from a generation ago. For example, the ten-year plan of action says that OIC member-states will invest in what it calls "advanced technologies" such as "nuclear technology for peaceful purposes". The technology for nuclear power is now more than half a century old, but there is no mention of more recent developments such as biotechnology, new materials, or nanotechnology.
Then there is Palestine/Israel. Israel may no longer be referred to as the "Zionist entity", but the OIC still maintains a "Bureau for Islamic Boycott of Israel". Will the election victory of Hamas provide an opportunity for the OIC to demonstrate its capacity to make a difference in the region?
Several OIC members now have contacts with Israel. These range from formal diplomatic relations (Egypt, Tunisia and Turkey) to informal contacts (Pervez Musharraf's famous handshake with Ariel Sharon at the United Nations). Europe's foreign ministers will therefore lose no opportunity in pressing Ihsanoglu to suggest that leaders of Hamas make some public gesture of Israel's existence; and that Hamas acknowledge that it will need to put its weapons beyond use. The OIC has more leverage on the second of these issues. Member-states provide financial and military assistance to the Palestinians, and the OIC has made a public pledge to counter any justification for extremism in the name of Islam. It would seem odd if an exception was made for Hamas.
When I spoke with Ihsanoglu in summer 2004 as he was preparing to take up his new job, he said: "The world has changed and the OIC needs to change with it." The OIC has travelled a long way in the direction of change in a relatively short time. Leaving aside the possibility that his term in office will be extended, Ihsanoglu has three more years to prove that his organisation really can go all the way.
Ends
07 March 2006
The Islamic world’s United Nations
Ehsan Masood
7 - 3 - 2006
The Organisation of the Islamic Conference is seeking to re-equip itself to play an active, engaged role in the global political arena. Ehsan Masood assesses the challenge facing the OIC's secretary- general, Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu.
On 17 February, an imam at a mosque in Peshawar, northern Pakistan, offered a $1 million bounty to anyone who would kill one of the Danish cartoonists who had caricatured the Prophet Mohammed in the pages of the newspaper Jyllands-Posten.
Maulana Yousef Qureshi's call could not have come at a worse time. Across the Muslim world, the cartoons controversy had reached a peak. Several cities in Pakistan had seen demonstrations that ended in violence. Now the capital Islamabad, a small city surrounded by hills and dominated by the business of government and diplomacy, was feeling the pressure. The leadership of Islamist political parties wanted to lead a protest march into the capital, but were being prevented from doing so because they were refusing to guarantee that the demonstrations would remain peaceful.
I was flying into Islamabad to attend a meeting of science ministers of Muslim states. As my plane prepared to land, roads into the capital were closed to traffic. Schools and businesses in the adjacent city of Rawalpindi were also shut and police dressed in riot- gear lined part of the drive from the airport to the city centre. For the next twenty-four hours we held our breath.
The fact that the next few days passed off without incident may have had something to do with the presence in Islamabad of Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, the Turkish secretary-general of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC). The OIC, founded in 1969 and based in Saudi Arabia's port-city of Jeddah, represents fifty-seven predominantly Muslim countries and is the largest intergovernmental organisation outside the United Nations system.
A testIt was one of the biggest tests Ihsanoglu had faced since being elected to lead the OIC in June 2004. At a press conference in Islamabad on 21 February, he said the cartoons controversy had everything to do with respecting the feelings of religious minorities. It was not about freedom of speech, about which "there are no two opinions". Responding to a question on the bounty, Ihsanoglu angrily said: "We have no authority to kill anybody and take the law in our hands." Ihsanoglu was emphatic: "Such a fatwa goes against Islam."
His comments were widely reported in Pakistan's press and may have helped to release some of the tension. Ihsanoglu is respected across the Muslim world. In Pakistan (as elsewhere) Islamists cannot criticise him in the same way they routinely do President Pervez Musharraf. This is partly because he represents the consensus (and the conscience) of the Muslim world.
But there is a more practical, immediate reason: it was the OIC's December 2005 summit in Mecca – where the notorious "expanded" dossier of cartoons produced by Danish imams seeking to mobilise Muslim anger was circulated – that helped to alert Muslims to the images' existence. The OIC's vigorous condemnation of the "desecration" and its concern over the "rising hatred of Muslims" in Europe follows its decision to establish what it calls an "Islamophobia Observatory" in Jeddah, with a brief to document and publicise prejudice against Muslims in countries where they are a minority of the population.
Such initiatives have helped raise the OIC's profile – and not just among Muslims. Ihsanoglu is much in demand in the capitals of Europe. In the past few months his office in Jeddah has hosted high-profile visitors, including United Nations secretary-general Kofi Annan; those in regular contact include European Union foreign-policy chief Javier Solana and British foreign secretary Jack Straw.
This week Ihsanoglu comes to Britain, a rare destination for an OIC chief. In addition to meetings with Muslim community groups and at the foreign office, he will speak at the opening of 1001 Inventions, a new exhibition at the Manchester Science Museum on the contribution of Arabs and Muslims to modern life.
Ihsanoglu says that one of the themes he wants to talk about is Islamophobia and how it can be combatted. OIC countries want him to look into the possibility of a resolution in the European parliament on Islamophobia as well as a new code of ethics for the media. At the same time he also wants to talk about reforms in the OIC, the most ambitious in its thirty-seven-year history.
The Organisation of the Islamic Conference came into existence after a conference of heads of state of Muslim countries in Rabat, Morocco. The meeting had been called by Muslim states to coordinate a boycott of Israel following an arson attack on the al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem (on this incident – a neglected precursor of the Salman Rushdie and Danish cartoon affairs – see Fred Halliday's openDemocracy article, "Blasphemy and power", February 2006).
The fledgling organisation quickly grew into a complex network of specialised agencies each aimed at strengthening bonds between Muslim states. These agencies include the Islamic Development Bank in Saudi Arabia, Comstech (itself based in Islamabad, which promotes scientific cooperation), a network of universities, and an OIC-wide news agency.
A time to make wavesThe institutional architecture may look impressive, but the way the OIC is run reflects the democratic deficit in many Muslim countries. For example, its highest decision-making body calls itself the "Conference of Kings and Heads of State and Government". Until recently, its workings were opaque to the outside world (even to citizens of Muslim states). There are few opportunities for non- government groups (such as charities, trade unions, professional societies or business) to participate in its decisions. Only five new countries have been given observer status (Russia was admitted in 2005; India is being discussed), and the OIC has little contact or cooperation with other organisations in the global community, such as agencies attached to the UN.
This very absence of engagement and connection has meant that inside the OIC, pressures for change have been incubating for some time. In 2004, several of the OIC's more influential players (including Malaysia, Pakistan and Turkey) supported the candidacy of Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu as a figure who would implement reforms of the organisation to make it more outward-looking.
The choice was a smart one. Ihsanoglu is not a diplomat in the usual sense, but a historian (specialising in the transfer of technology from Europe to the Ottoman empire) and a former president of the International Union for the History and Philosophy of Science. At the same time he is an OIC-insider having headed the OIC-affiliated centre for research in Islamic art and culture (Ircica), which is based in Turkey. This profile makes him ideally placed to play a less bureaucratic and more outspoken role than his predecessors.
Ihsanoglu is also assuming the leadership of the IOC at an opportune time, when significant reform of the organisation is already on its agenda. The Mecca summit in December – an extraordinary gathering of OIC heads of state – agreed to support most of the recommendation of a commission of experts charged with envisioning the IOC's renewal. There, a ten-year action plan was signed and it was agreed that the organisation needs a complete internal overhaul: a new charter, a new name, more staff, and even a new building.
The action plan is an impressive document. It promises an organisation that will uphold transparency and accountability in governance and protect the rights of women, children and minorities. It promises to promote sustainable development and to assist the least developed states in tackling diseases such as Aids, malaria and tuberculosis (twenty-seven OIC member-states are African). It also pledges to work more closely with international agencies and with existing development initiatives such as the New Partnership for Africa's Development (Nepad) and the UN's Millennium Development Goals.
The action plan also promises concrete steps on theological issues, for example confronting ideologies that claim to be able to use Islamic rulings to justify extremism. Meanwhile, Ihsanoglu has opened up the Jeddah secretariat to the outside world. We know this because the OIC website contains details of where he goes, who he meets, even names of people that he speaks with on the phone.
A turning-point?All of this represents genuine progress. For a predominantly Muslim body to acknowledge good governance, rights for children, the threat from Aids is welcome evidence of fresh, innovative thinking. Some of the OIC's specialist development agencies (such as Comstech) have already started to coordinate what they do with other specialised agencies outside of the OIC system.
Yet some of the text in the OIC's reform package seems unchanged from a generation ago. For example, the ten-year plan of action says that OIC member-states will invest in what it calls "advanced technologies" such as "nuclear technology for peaceful purposes". The technology for nuclear power is now more than half a century old, but there is no mention of more recent developments such as biotechnology, new materials, or nanotechnology.
Then there is Palestine/Israel. Israel may no longer be referred to as the "Zionist entity", but the OIC still maintains a "Bureau for Islamic Boycott of Israel". Will the election victory of Hamas provide an opportunity for the OIC to demonstrate its capacity to make a difference in the region?
Several OIC members now have contacts with Israel. These range from formal diplomatic relations (Egypt, Tunisia and Turkey) to informal contacts (Pervez Musharraf's famous handshake with Ariel Sharon at the United Nations). Europe's foreign ministers will therefore lose no opportunity in pressing Ihsanoglu to suggest that leaders of Hamas make some public gesture of Israel's existence; and that Hamas acknowledge that it will need to put its weapons beyond use. The OIC has more leverage on the second of these issues. Member-states provide financial and military assistance to the Palestinians, and the OIC has made a public pledge to counter any justification for extremism in the name of Islam. It would seem odd if an exception was made for Hamas.
When I spoke with Ihsanoglu in summer 2004 as he was preparing to take up his new job, he said: "The world has changed and the OIC needs to change with it." The OIC has travelled a long way in the direction of change in a relatively short time. Leaving aside the possibility that his term in office will be extended, Ihsanoglu has three more years to prove that his organisation really can go all the way.
Ends
Revenge fear after 15 die in blasts on eve of holy festival
The Times, LondonWorld News
March 08, 2006
Revenge fear after 15 die in blasts on eve of holy festival
By Raekha Prasad in Delhi
INDIA was on high alert last night after a series of explosions tore through the country’s holiest Hindu city, sparking fears of renewed communal violence.
The blasts struck a crowded temple and the railway station in Varanasi, leaving at least 15 dead and scores injured.
Religious institutions across the country, particularly Hindu temples, are braced for further attacks. Sniffer dogs have been deployed at religious sites in leading cities and devotees were being searched before being allowed to worship. Manmohan Singh, the Prime Minister, appealed for calm, fearing a resurgence in violence between Hindus and Muslims.
The attacks on the temple-studded city on the bank of the river Ganges came as Hindus prepared for one of their most important festivals.
Television footage of the Sankat Mochan temple, where the first of three explosions struck, showed its white marble walls and floors stained with blood. Shoes of the dead and injured devotees were strewn on the ground among scattered offerings of leaves and sweets. Shards of bloodied glass littered the ground outside.Rescue workers struggled to move the injured to safety through the narrow and cobbled lanes where the temple is located. Footage showed bleeding survivors being carried away on blankets. An old woman lay on the floor, holding up her arms to helpers, who pulled her away. Several among the 60 hurt had been critically injured. The explosions were timed to coincide with the arrival of hundreds of worshippers at the temple, which is one of India’s oldest and dedicated to the Hindu monkey god Hanuman. Tuesday is considered particularly holy by devotees and the temple was packed with pilgrims.
The first explosion happened outside the building at about 6pm, and was followed by two others at the city’s main railway station. One explosion tore through a packed train carriage as travellers prepared to leave the city for the Hindu festival of colour, Holi, next week. Another detonation occurred inside the ticket hall.Officials said that police had defused a bomb in a residential area, and had found four other devices at rest places on the banks of the Ganges.
Although none of the Islamic separatist groups, Maoists or tribal groups fighting in various parts of the country immediately claimed responsibility, commentators said that the aim was to stir up trouble between the two main religious communities.
Tensions between Hindus and Muslims were strained in Uttar Pradesh, the state where Varanasi is located, after a visit to India last week by George Bush. Yashpal Singh, the police chief of Uttar Pradesh state, said he suspected the Pakistan-based Islamic militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba.
Yesterday’s attack was the second on a holy Hindu site in the state in the past year.
In July gunmen stormed Ayodhya, a city sacred to both Hindus and Muslims, and a tinderbox for communal violence. In 1992, more than 2,000 people were killed in religious riots after Hindu mobs razed a 16th-century mosque in Ayodhya. Last night a government spokesman said: “The Prime Minister has appealed for people to remain calm. The Government is dealing with the situation and people should maintain peace.”
SACRED CITY. Varanasi is a centre of worship for the Hindu God, Lord Shiva, making it one of the most sacred places for Hindu pilgrims. The River Ganges, which runs through the city, is said to wash away the sins of mortals. Every day thousands of pilgrims journey to steps on the river’s banks, known as ghats, to bathe in its waters. Traditionally, cremations are also carried out on the ghats, with the ashes from the pyres scattered in the water. Dying in the city enables Hindus to escape the cycle of birth and rebirth
Copyright 2006 Times Newspapers Ltd.
March 08, 2006
Revenge fear after 15 die in blasts on eve of holy festival
By Raekha Prasad in Delhi
INDIA was on high alert last night after a series of explosions tore through the country’s holiest Hindu city, sparking fears of renewed communal violence.
The blasts struck a crowded temple and the railway station in Varanasi, leaving at least 15 dead and scores injured.
Religious institutions across the country, particularly Hindu temples, are braced for further attacks. Sniffer dogs have been deployed at religious sites in leading cities and devotees were being searched before being allowed to worship. Manmohan Singh, the Prime Minister, appealed for calm, fearing a resurgence in violence between Hindus and Muslims.
The attacks on the temple-studded city on the bank of the river Ganges came as Hindus prepared for one of their most important festivals.
Television footage of the Sankat Mochan temple, where the first of three explosions struck, showed its white marble walls and floors stained with blood. Shoes of the dead and injured devotees were strewn on the ground among scattered offerings of leaves and sweets. Shards of bloodied glass littered the ground outside.Rescue workers struggled to move the injured to safety through the narrow and cobbled lanes where the temple is located. Footage showed bleeding survivors being carried away on blankets. An old woman lay on the floor, holding up her arms to helpers, who pulled her away. Several among the 60 hurt had been critically injured. The explosions were timed to coincide with the arrival of hundreds of worshippers at the temple, which is one of India’s oldest and dedicated to the Hindu monkey god Hanuman. Tuesday is considered particularly holy by devotees and the temple was packed with pilgrims.
The first explosion happened outside the building at about 6pm, and was followed by two others at the city’s main railway station. One explosion tore through a packed train carriage as travellers prepared to leave the city for the Hindu festival of colour, Holi, next week. Another detonation occurred inside the ticket hall.Officials said that police had defused a bomb in a residential area, and had found four other devices at rest places on the banks of the Ganges.
Although none of the Islamic separatist groups, Maoists or tribal groups fighting in various parts of the country immediately claimed responsibility, commentators said that the aim was to stir up trouble between the two main religious communities.
Tensions between Hindus and Muslims were strained in Uttar Pradesh, the state where Varanasi is located, after a visit to India last week by George Bush. Yashpal Singh, the police chief of Uttar Pradesh state, said he suspected the Pakistan-based Islamic militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba.
Yesterday’s attack was the second on a holy Hindu site in the state in the past year.
In July gunmen stormed Ayodhya, a city sacred to both Hindus and Muslims, and a tinderbox for communal violence. In 1992, more than 2,000 people were killed in religious riots after Hindu mobs razed a 16th-century mosque in Ayodhya. Last night a government spokesman said: “The Prime Minister has appealed for people to remain calm. The Government is dealing with the situation and people should maintain peace.”
SACRED CITY. Varanasi is a centre of worship for the Hindu God, Lord Shiva, making it one of the most sacred places for Hindu pilgrims. The River Ganges, which runs through the city, is said to wash away the sins of mortals. Every day thousands of pilgrims journey to steps on the river’s banks, known as ghats, to bathe in its waters. Traditionally, cremations are also carried out on the ghats, with the ashes from the pyres scattered in the water. Dying in the city enables Hindus to escape the cycle of birth and rebirth
Copyright 2006 Times Newspapers Ltd.
Hamas and Israel: They must talk
The Guardian, London
Hamas and Israel: They must talk
Wednesday March 8, 2006
The Guardian
Ismail Haniyeh, the Palestinian prime minister, does not mince words in complaining that the US and Europe apply double standards to Palestinians and Israelis and that Palestinian Authority funding is to be cut because his now ruling Hamas movement is designated a terrorist organisation that does not recognise Israel. Reality is a tad more nuanced: US and EU funding to the PA is under threat, but much aid is likely to continue via the World Bank because ordinary people will suffer if it does not and gaps are likely to be filled by Iran and Syria - hardly the best way to promote moderation.
It would be a mistake to fetishise the recognition question. The fact is that Israel has F16s, nuclear weapons, UN membership and international legitimacy. None of that will be taken away whether or not Hamas stops calling for the destruction of the Jewish state or amends its founding charter. The best hope is for a gradual, organic process of pragmatic acceptance that Israel is there to stay. It is unlikely to be enthusiastic but it will surely come, just as it eventually did when the PLO was in charge.
Refraining from violence is more important and Hamas has done that for a year - though it would be wrong to forget that it was responsible for many suicide bombings that deliberately targeted Israeli civilians - or indeed that Israeli actions have killed even more Palestinians: thus yesterday's stark warning by Israel's defence minister that Mr Haniyeh could be targeted if attacks resumed. A formal long-term ceasefire - reciprocated by Israel - could dull bad memories. But if Israel is to negotiate a lasting peace, it needs a partner. The outside world must do all it can to help. Conditional engagement should nudge Hamas in that direction.
The Islamists won January's elections not because a majority of Palestinians suddenly became fundamentalists, but because the PA under Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas was corrupt and ineffective, largely because the Oslo accords failed to deliver viable independence. No one should be surprised that Hamas will not accept those accords - long pronounced dead by Israel. The same is true of the "road map" to peace, also more honoured in the breach than the observance by Israel. The best hope must be that the next Israeli government - led by the Kadima party founded by Ariel Sharon - will eschew unilateral withdrawals and return to it so that Hamas can follow suit. Hamas is a new Middle Eastern reality that makes it much harder to get these two bitter enemies to deal with each other. But in the end they must talk - or carry on dying.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
Hamas and Israel: They must talk
Wednesday March 8, 2006
The Guardian
Ismail Haniyeh, the Palestinian prime minister, does not mince words in complaining that the US and Europe apply double standards to Palestinians and Israelis and that Palestinian Authority funding is to be cut because his now ruling Hamas movement is designated a terrorist organisation that does not recognise Israel. Reality is a tad more nuanced: US and EU funding to the PA is under threat, but much aid is likely to continue via the World Bank because ordinary people will suffer if it does not and gaps are likely to be filled by Iran and Syria - hardly the best way to promote moderation.
It would be a mistake to fetishise the recognition question. The fact is that Israel has F16s, nuclear weapons, UN membership and international legitimacy. None of that will be taken away whether or not Hamas stops calling for the destruction of the Jewish state or amends its founding charter. The best hope is for a gradual, organic process of pragmatic acceptance that Israel is there to stay. It is unlikely to be enthusiastic but it will surely come, just as it eventually did when the PLO was in charge.
Refraining from violence is more important and Hamas has done that for a year - though it would be wrong to forget that it was responsible for many suicide bombings that deliberately targeted Israeli civilians - or indeed that Israeli actions have killed even more Palestinians: thus yesterday's stark warning by Israel's defence minister that Mr Haniyeh could be targeted if attacks resumed. A formal long-term ceasefire - reciprocated by Israel - could dull bad memories. But if Israel is to negotiate a lasting peace, it needs a partner. The outside world must do all it can to help. Conditional engagement should nudge Hamas in that direction.
The Islamists won January's elections not because a majority of Palestinians suddenly became fundamentalists, but because the PA under Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas was corrupt and ineffective, largely because the Oslo accords failed to deliver viable independence. No one should be surprised that Hamas will not accept those accords - long pronounced dead by Israel. The same is true of the "road map" to peace, also more honoured in the breach than the observance by Israel. The best hope must be that the next Israeli government - led by the Kadima party founded by Ariel Sharon - will eschew unilateral withdrawals and return to it so that Hamas can follow suit. Hamas is a new Middle Eastern reality that makes it much harder to get these two bitter enemies to deal with each other. But in the end they must talk - or carry on dying.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)