English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest world news

Fair Is Foul And Foul Is Fair In Syria

Published

on

Fair Is Foul And Foul Is Fair In Syria

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

By Saeed Naqvi

 Like Henry Kissinger, New York Times columnist, Thomas L Friedman, belongs to a growing tribe of strategists who insist that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict has been overshadowed, indeed overwhelmed, by a much bigger, Shia-Sunni faultline.

 Even though Osama bin Laden, the 9/11 hijackers, Wahabism, Salafism, are all traced to Saudi Arabia, the US, Israel and the West in general have developed a high comfort level with Saudi Arabia regardless. In this framework, the West has placed the Shia world in opposition to it.

 Was it always like this? Consider this recent historical perspective.

 “As we approach the season of the Nobel Peace Prize, I would like to nominate the spiritual leader of Iraq’s Shiites, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, for this year’s medal.” The recommendation came from NYT ace columnist, Friedman. For emphasis, he added: “I’m serious.”

 This was in 2005. Friedman, was “in” with George W. Bush. In ecstatic pieces for the world’s most powerful newspaper, the NYT, he repeatedly described the occupation of Iraq as history’s greatest effort at democratization.

 Americans had come against Saddam Hussain, a tough Baathist and atheist by belief and a manufacturer of weapons of mass destruction. Remember Saddam invoked “Allah” for political mobilization only after the 1992 operation Desert Storm. He had Allah o Akbar inscribed on an otherwise secular emblem as an afterthought.

The eclipse of Saddam brought great relief to Shias in the South – around the holy cities of Najaf, Karbala and oil rich enclaves neighbouring Basra. For the first time the world realized that Shias were an overwhelming majority in all of Iraq.

 A triangular situation had emerged – the occupying Americans, Sunni (plus Kurdish) minority and the Shia majority. The Shias, led by Ayatollah Sistani, played a straight political hand. Once occupation had taken place, he encouraged the occupiers against his tormentor, Saddam Hussain.

 That is when Friedman was moved to write:

“If some kind of democracy takes root here (Iraq), it will also be due in large measure to the instincts and directives of the dominant Iraqi Shiite communal leader, Ayatollah Sistani.”

 “It was Sistani who insisted that the elections not be postponed in the face of the Baathist-fascist insurgency. And it was Sistani who ordered Shiites not to retaliate for the Sunni Baathist and Jihadist attempts to drag them into civil war by attacking Shiite mosques and massacring Shiite civilians.”

 Friedman proceeded to compare the Ayatollah with other icons who helped bring democracy to their respective countries – Nelson Mandela and Mikhail Gorbachev.  The quality of democracy that obtains in Russia, Iraq and South must be left for Friedman to applaud.

 Rightly or wrongly, Friedman extrapolated from his experience in Iraq. This is at a variance from the fraud Bush’s Defence Secretary, Dick Cheney sought to perpetrate on April 9, 2003, when he had the marines pull down Saddam Hussain’s state at Firdous square and attributed the event to a popular uprising.

Friedman zigzagged along shifting convictions, until by August 2015, he began to show the first signs of tolerating something so totally different from Sistani as to take one’s breath away. In a conversation with Barack Obama he appeared to be nodding agreement on a kind of positive ambiguity about the ISIS.

Sudden and exponential growth of the Islamic State was something of a mystery. It is in the nature of the post colonial media that the views of Developing country elites particularly in the Arab world (except allies like Saudi Arabia, other GCC countries and Jordan) never get reflected in the media. How did the elites in Iraq, Oman, Yemen, Syria, Egypt, Iran and other Muslim countries view the IS phenomenon. Without exception, they described it as an American, French, British, Saudi, Qatari and Turkish cooperative effort. I know first hand. Ask the ambassadors in New Delhi.

If this is what they thought, why were they silent? They were not silent, but their protestations were ignored by the global networks. So hopelessly one sided is the global media, that even shining stars of independent journalism like Seymour Hersh and Robert Fisk are killed by a simple trick of being ignored.

 Writing on Donald Trump’s proposed visit to the centres of semitic religions, Riyadh, the Vatican and Jerusalem, Fisk satirically speculates: “Trump will be able to ask Netanyahu for help against the IS without – presumably – realizing that Israel bombs only the Syrian army and the Shia Hezbollah in Syria but has never – ever – bombed IS in Syria. In fact, the Israelis have given medical aid to fighters from Jabhat al Nusra which is part of Al Qaeda which attacked the US on 9/11.”

 By universal consent, Fisk is among the most knowledgeable journalist who has lived in West Asia for decades. But the Imperial Information order keeps him outside the ken.

Truth however has a way of surfacing. Let us revert to Friedman’s interview with Obama. Friedman asked Obama why he delayed taking action against the IS when it was in its nascent stages?

Obama replies: “That we did not just start taking a bunch of airstrikes all across Iraq as soon as the IS came in was because that would have taken the pressure off Iraqi Prime Minister, Nouri al Maliki.”

 In other words, by the US President’s own admission, the IS at that stage worked as an asset to apply pressure on Maliki who was in bad adour with the US because he had refused to sign the Status of Forces Agreement with the US ironically on the advice of exactly the person Friedman was recommending for a Nobel Peace Prize in 2005 – Sistani.

Lo and behold, in his recent column, Friedman is advising Trump to give up the pretense of fighting IS – because that is not in the US (and presumably Israel’s) national interest.

 He wants “Trump to be Trump – utterly cynical and unpredictable. ISIS right now is the biggest threat to Iran, Hezbollah, Russia and pro-Shiite Iranian militias.”

 “In Syria” Friedman recommends, “Trump should let ISIS be Assad’s, Iran’s Hezbollah’s and Russia’s headache.” In other words, let the IS be a western asset.

 A recent cartoon with a most succinct message shows one Saudi ask another:

“We finance wars all around us, when shall we bomb the Jewish state?”

 “When it becomes Shia.”

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Latest world news

PM Modi underlines deep Aus ties at Sydney show for NRIs, Indian Australians

Addressing a gathering of Australians of Indian origin and NRIs based in the country in Sydney, PM Modi recalled his first visit to Down Under and listed the many things that connected the two countries

Published

on

PM Modi underlines deep Aus ties at Sydney show for NRIs, Indian Australians

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Tuesday said Australia and India have always shared common interests including keeping the Indo-Pacific a free, open and inclusive area.

Addressing a gathering of Australians of Indian origin and NRIs based in the country in Sydney, PM Modi recalled his first visit to Down Under and listed the many things that connected the two countries. He noted that India and Australia are keen cricketing nations and shared many more close links from MasterChef and yoga. PM Modi spoke about the sadness many cricket-loving Indians felt on the death of Australian spin wizard Shane Warne.

The PM noted that the Indo-Pacific region faces a number of challenges such as the security of sea lanes of communication, terrorism, climate change and piracy. He said these issues can be addressed through shared efforts.

He said that both he and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese wanted to take their ties much closer. PM Modi said he was confident that he would Indo-Australian relations to the next level. There was large scope to identify new areas of complementing each other and increase cooperation between the two nations. This would also happen in closer defence and security ties to ensure open and free communication in Indo-Pacific.

He highlighted the fact that there was high degree of mutual trust between the two countries that had translated into increased co-operation on defence and security matters, which was already visible with the navies of the two countries participating in joint naval exercises.

He stated India’s position in the world as the force of global good. He said that India always had a helping hand whenever there was a disaster. He hailed India as the mother of democracy and as a bright spot for the world’s economy.

Prime Minister Modi and his Australian counterpart renamed the Sydney suburb ‘Little India’ during the mega community event at the Qudos Bank Arena  in Sydney Olympic Park. He also announced that a new consulate will be opened in Brisbane soon.

PM Modi was visiting Australia after nine years after 2014. The organisers of the Tuesday bash, the Indian Australian Diaspora Foundation (IADF), had anticipated a sizeable turnout and were not disappointed by the multitudes welcoming the PM. Special buses had been organized by Modi supporters from Brisbane and Canberra.

Indians comprise 2.8% of the Australian population, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

He also added that the the Indo-Pacific region faces a number of challenges such as security of  sea lanes of communication , terrorism, climate change and piracy. He said that these issues can be addressed through shared efforts. He also added that he could not be satisfied easily.

He said that Prime minister Albanese was same in this regard. He said he was confident that he would Indo-Australian relations to the next level. There was large scope to identify new areas of complementariness and increase cooperation between the two nations. PM Modi said he wants to take India’s relationship with the Australia to the next level which include closer defence and security ties to ensure open and free communication in Indo-Pacific. He highlighted the fact that there was high degree of mutual trust between the two countries that had translated into increased co-operation on defence and security matters.

As a result of which the navies of the two countries are participating in joint naval exercises.

Continue Reading

Latest Politics News

PM Narendra Modi hosts lunch in Papua New Guinea

The lunch, attended by the leaders attending the third India-Pacific Islands Cooperation (FIPIC) Summit in Papua New Guinea , aimed to foster stronger ties. Dragon fruit, which is native to Central America but is now widely cultivated in various parts of the world, including Papua New Guinea, was the focal point of the menu.

Published

on

Lunch hosted by PM Narendra Modi during his visit to Papua New Guinea

During his official visit to Papua New Guinea, Prime Minister Narendra Modi hosted a special lunch where the star ingredient showcased the unique culinary heritage of the region. The lunch, held in Port Moresby, featured the exotic fruit, ‘pitaya’ or dragon fruit, as a prominent ingredient in the menu, highlighting the growing importance of international culinary exchanges and cultural diplomacy.

The lunch, was attended by the leaders attending the third India-Pacific Islands Cooperation (FIPIC) Summit in Papua New Guinea . Dragon fruit, which is native to Central America but is now widely cultivated in various parts of the world, including Papua New Guinea, was the focal point of the menu.

The menu showcased a range of dishes that incorporated the vibrant and flavorful dragon fruit. From refreshing salads to innovative desserts, each dish was meticulously prepared to highlight the fruit’s unique texture and taste. The inclusion of dragon fruit in the menu not only added a visual appeal but also symbolized the diversity and richness of the culinary traditions in both India and Papua New Guinea.

Prime Minister Modi, known for his emphasis on cultural diplomacy, acknowledged the importance of food as a powerful medium for strengthening bonds between nations. He highlighted the significance of showcasing the diverse cuisines and culinary traditions as a means to deepen understanding and appreciation of different cultures.

The inclusion of dragon fruit in the lunch menu also reflected the growing popularity of this exotic fruit in various global cuisines. Dragon fruit has gained recognition for its nutritional value, vibrant colour, and distinct flavour, making it a favourite ingredient among chefs and food enthusiasts. The special lunch hosted by Prime Minister Modi in Papua New Guinea served as a platform to celebrate the fusion of Indian and Papua New Guinean culinary traditions. It provided an opportunity for the dignitaries and officials to engage in cultural exchange and foster a deeper understanding of each other’s heritage.

Continue Reading

India News

Delhi High Court issues notice in BBC defamation case over PM documentary

The documentary, which was aired by the BBC early this year, examined the role of various individuals and organizations during the communal violence that shook Gujarat in 2002. It alleged that several politicians, including the petitioner, played a divisive role and incited violence during the riots.

Published

on

Delhi High Court summons BBC in defamation case over PM documentary

The Delhi High Court has issued notice in a defamation case related to the screening of the documentary on the 2002 Gujarat riots India: The Modi Question by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). The notice was issued in a petition filed by a Gujarat-based NGO which said the documentary portrayed the RSS, BJP and Prime Minister Narendra Modi in a defamatory and misleading manner.

The documentary, which was aired by the BBC early this year, examined the role of various individuals and organizations during the communal violence that shook Gujarat in 2002. It alleged that several politicians, including the petitioner, played a divisive role and incited violence during the riots. The documentary also claimed that the state government at the time turned a blind eye to the atrocities committed against religious minorities.

The petitioner contended that the documentary had damaged his reputation and was defamatory in nature. He argued that the content presented by the BBC was biased and aimed at tarnishing his image without providing a fair opportunity for him to present his side of the story. The petitioner sought damages and requested the court to direct the BBC to issue a public apology and withdraw the documentary.

Taking cognizance of the matter, the Delhi High Court has issued notice to the representatives from the BBC to appear before it and respond to the allegations of defamation. The court’s decision reflects its commitment to upholding the principles of fairness and ensuring that all parties involved have an opportunity to present their perspectives.

This case highlights the delicate balance between freedom of expression and protection against defamation. While the media plays a crucial role in bringing forth important issues and holding those in power accountable, it is also essential to ensure that individuals are not wrongly defamed or subjected to unfair portrayal.

The notice issued by the Delhi High Court to the BBC indicates that the court is taking the matter seriously and will examine the allegations of defamation made by the petitioner. It also sends a message that responsible journalism should be based on thorough research, unbiased reporting, and a fair representation of all viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Trending

-->

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com