War is a crime
As published in The Sun
The famous picture of the hooded guy tortured in Abu Ghraib has been appearing in print advertisements promoting a war crimes conference and exhibition to be organised by the Perdana Global Peace Organisation (PGPO). The torture victim is reportedly in town and will be addressing the conference in Kuala Lumpur next month, along with numerous other speakers from all over the world.
Like their previous forums, which also showcased internationally renowned personalities, the organisation can expect a good response for the event. There are many of us who are genuinely interested in international affairs, particularly the Middle East crisis and nuclear proliferation. They include academics, activists, government personnel as well as regular members of society who simply want to learn more about current issues from experts in the field.
University students, especially in related disciplines, should look forward to the event because it is not often that we have public conferences featuring international speakers. These students should take the opportunity to participate and gain exposure on the different perspectives offered by say, a former UN Secretary-General, an American Congresswoman or indeed, an Abu Ghraib detainee.
Some believe it would be unlike Malaysian students to take the initiative to participate individually, rather would be more comfortable going in groups. Here, the onus is on the respective colleges and universities to encourage, in fact organise, their students to attend such conferences. Naturally, it is very expensive to invite international speakers to present on campus, but here is an opportunity to see a whole line-up of them in one sitting without charge.
The press too must be excited about the upcoming event. However, one wonders if they would be interested in the substance of the conference or just the Chairman of the event, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad. One cannot help but to anticipate the local press trying to cucuk (instigate) Dr M for sizzling statements concerning local politics. Foreign media on the other hand, may prefer to fish for statements that can be generalised as anti-West.
Looking at the conference agenda, one can easily assume that it will be an America-bashing session. Then again, in discussing war, invasion, and occupation in the post-colonial age, it is inevitable that the role of the US, Israel and the “coalition of the willing” are critiqued.
However, let us not be so preoccupied with these states that we downplay other threats such as the rift between the nuclear states India and Pakistan. We should also be concerned about the destabilisation of Africa due to civil wars as well as totalitarian and military governments. And while we object to the discriminatory Euro-American policy on Iran and North Korea, we should be cautious not to suggest support for latter’s nuclear ambitions.
Developing nuclear energy is dangerous and history has shown us the devastating consequences of nuclear radiation in Chernobyl. It does not matter whether it is developed by so-called “civilised” states, nor does it matter if it is developed for military or civilian use. Even the slightest accident can cause nuclear radiation to devastate entire communities for generations. One wonders then why any society would encourage their government to pursue development of nuclear energy.
Nevertheless, one must acknowledge that the effort by Perdana Global Peace Organisation in initiating an international movement to criminalise war is timely and urgent. We live in a time of the “pre-emptive strike” and where military technology is advanced enough to destruct whole countries within minutes.
One can imagine sceptics doubting the United Nations would respond to this movement. Here is where we, the world civil society, come in. Collectively, we can play an active role in urging our governments to push for a United Nations resolution to criminalise war. But it is equally important that we also endorse the international call for reform of the Security Council, which is currently dominated by five states with veto power.
The call of the people, by right, should resonate in the United Nations through the elected governments that represent us there. The support of world governments for a UN resolution to criminalise war, following the democratisation of the Security Council, will allow for legitimate international effort of regulation and enforcement.
Is this really an impossible cause? Well, that was probably what many once thought of the women’s suffrage and Greenpeace movements. But see how far they have progressed.
Santa to the rescue
As published in The Sun
Dear Santa,
Not so long ago this column published my letter to the prime minister. In the letter I appealed for serious efforts by the government to strengthen relations between the various religious communities in Malaysia.
Additionally, I welcomed the prime minister’s enthusiasm in wanting to stimulate an intellectual renaissance through all-round quality education.
Nevertheless, I also called for greater distance in Malaysia’s relationship with war-mongering governments because I thought that would be the right thing to do since we are after all a principled, pro-peace Hadhari society.
On this topic, Santa, I suggested for Malaysia to hold back on Free Trade Agreement talks with the United States – a call merely echoing Latin American governments that have already testified to inequality in such pacts with the particular warmongering state. I also suggested that we not allow any more warships destined to participate in the Middle East violence to dock at our shores.
Since that letter however, inter-religious and inter-racial relations have severely deteriorated in Malaysia.
What’s more, our leaders do not seem earnest in handling the problem since many appear to be getting away with seditious crimes like spreading horrifying fitnah (lies) through text messages and promoting xenophobia on television.
We have also since seen our university standings plunge in the world rankings, although I cannot quite remember if we blamed our underperformance on Western bias and conspiracies again this time around.
And despite a lot of talk about bina insan (character development) and providing all-round quality education to confront Malaysia’s brain drain problem, nothing has been done to liberalise the Universities and University Colleges Act.
You might also be interested to know, Santa, the government has also pursued further talks with the United States for a Free Trade Agreement and allowed yet another military aircraft carrier to dock in Malaysia while on its way to the Persian Gulf.
On top of that, we welcomed and gave special treatment to John Howard and Condi Rice at an international conference we hosted here in Kuala Lumpur. The latter was even furnished with a piano and invited to play a few tunes for our distinguished guests.
That said, I have no choice but to conclude that the prime minister either did not read my letter, or worse, does not love me enough and has therefore done the opposite for all my appeals.
Dejected, I have resorted to writing to you instead – an old, bearded, seasons-greetings, fictitious, pink celebrity. I therefore seek your good offices, dear Santa, to help with the above issues.
Maybe you can help restore trust between religious communities in Malaysia. While you’re at it, please also advise the government against allowing foreign military vehicles to park here, especially those carrying nuclear warheads.
It may be too much to ask for you to free Palestine and eradicate poverty in Africa too, but please at least try granting the following for 2007:
1. A new chief for the Elections Commission and the state of Selangor.
2. Live telecasts of parliament proceedings. This will allow Malaysians to see for themselves the rude and immature behaviour of their elected representatives. Contrary to what the deputy prime minister recently said, live pictures do not give distorted impressions. Malaysians will also have the opportunity to see how the House Speaker easily blocks hot issues from being debated by dismissing the issues as “not urgent”.
3. Independent media. Let it not be the case that the only newspapers left not merged or gobbled up by media conglomerates are the opposition newspapers.
4. More women in leadership positions. For many years now, public universities have reported higher numbers in female student enrolment compared to male. Recent figures actually show an average minimum of 60% for female student enrolment in almost every public university.
This suggests there are more qualified women in the job market compared to men. It is only reasonable therefore for more women to be represented in leadership positions today, be it in business or politics.
5. One year’s supply of anti-nausea pills. Just something to help Malaysians get through the extra dose of propaganda expected to flood the media as the general election approaches.
I am counting on you, Santa! Cheers.
In a Hadhari frame of mind
As published in The Sun
It seems quite hip these days to write open letters to political leaders, so since I desperately want to be cool, I’ve decided to write one too. I thought I’d tell you that I’ve taken the liberty to read up about Islam Hadhari to identify its revolutionary aspects. Um, not much luck so far, but I haven’t given up.
I’ve even gone to the extent of re-reading Ibn Khaldun’s Muqaddimah since that is the only reference I know of that mentions Hadhari. I find Khaldun’s definition of a Hadhari society however somewhat materialistic and shallow, therefore bound for an “earlier” decline (Remember the cyclic theory of civilisation that says all civilisations rise and fall at some point or another?). I’m sure that’s hardly your dream for our society, rather one that is worldly in a progressive and modern cinta-IT-sayang-IT sort of way, at the same time highly moral and spiritual. The society you envisage, I believe, is also one that will be a model community for the greater Muslim ummah. If such is the case, I would like to contribute some ideas for your consideration.
Your Excellency, serious efforts must be made by the government to further strengthen relations between the various religious communities in Malaysia. In order to preserve the peace and harmony we’ve been enjoying over the decades, inter-religious relations will have to go beyond gentlemanly tolerance to one that is meaningful. In this new era of religious strife, religious communities have a great role to play in maintaining peace and promoting development. Therefore, to establish a meaningful relationship between the communities, their right to civil and intellectual dialogue has to be guaranteed and protected. Islam after all encourages diverse groups to dialogue rather than resort to conflict, no? Dialogue is the only way for religious communities to understand and appreciate one another’s differences, and be united by their commonalities. As a rabbi once said: If religion is not part of a solution, it will certainly be part of the problem.
Besides that, an intellectual tradition akin to that of the Abbasid era has to be revived. The Ninth Malaysia Plan reflects the political will for this endeavour, with a huge chunk of the country’s budget being set aside for education. It is crucial however that the funds are well spent and administered by accountable managers. Identifying the right people for this, Your Excellency, may be one of your most difficult tasks.
Furthermore, with all due respect to the Multimedia Super Corridor and all that stuff, one must impress that any kind of intellectual development in Malaysia must include the areas of humanities and social sciences, and not just the fields of techno-tech. That said, a substantial amount of moolah should be made available for students who want to pursue their studies in these fields – which by the way, includes an array of subjects other than economics and architecture. For a society that hardly reads, I know this is a lot to ask. Maybe you should start small, perhaps with your own party members? I remember being told by one of your own, without shame or batting an eyelid, that “most of the guys in Umno don’t read”. Yezzzaaa …
On the international front … well, my mum always said that you are the friends you keep. I’m wondering then if it’s a good idea to be chummy with war-mongering governments like the United States, Britain and Australia. Moreover, these guys are now associated with a lot of horrible prison torture stories and other kinds of injustices, so close affiliation with them may not be good for the Islam Hadhari public relations campaign.
I’m in no way suggesting that we break diplomatic ties with these countries. We are after all moderates, and want access to world class education. Besides, we can’t get enough of Coca-Cola, Tesco – and imported beef. Nevertheless, these governments should know that we, the Hadhari people of Malaysia, do not sanction state-sponsored tyranny and therefore will not be too buddy-buddy with them until they show some civility. Not being buddy-buddy, Your Excellency, naturally includes abstaining from collaborating in a con-job Free Trade Agreement, or even allowing them to park their nuclear warships in our compound while on their way to the Persian Gulf for heaven-knows-what military operation involving our brethren in Iran.
That said, my brother says hi but wants me to end this letter so that he can check for latest football updates.
Wassalam, Pak Lah.
Stop White House madness, say ‘traitors’
As published in Sunday Mail
In April 1961, John F. Kennedy was humiliated in front of the whole world when the Bay of Pigs invasion led by CIA-trained Cuban exiles failed miserably to overthrow Fidel Castro.
Although unsuccessful and embarrassing, the event rallied public support at home for the Kennedy administration.
In his book An Informal History of America in the 1960s: Coming Apart, William O’Neill highlights that violent conflict with other nations unites citizens in backing their leader. When the president declares war, he is drawing a distinct line that separates the patriots and the traitors.
This way, the people are somewhat forced to support the government for to do otherwise would make them unpatriotic.
This is precisely the case in George W. Bush’s “War on Terror”. Bush has played the war rhetoric game on Americans to rally them thus far into launching a preemptive strike on Iraq.
Unable to see the imminent threat of Saddam Hussein and with the economy in shambles, Americans have taken a step back to evaluate the President’s motives. Is the attack necessary at this point in time or is this a desperate attempt to keep public support from declining due to the economy and corporate fraud?
As many Americans started to see steady progress made by the United Nations Security Council in disarming Iraq, they also became more opposing to the notion of a preemptive war. This anti-war sentiment, shared by most people outside the US, motivated thousands of Americans to take to the streets in protest.
I attended a protest in Washington D.C. on March 15, just two days before Bush announced his ultimatum to Saddam. About 100,000 people gathered at the Washington Monument at noon urging Bush to “stop the madness” and marched for 20 blocks and in front of the White House.
Organised by International A.N.S.W.E.R. (Act Now to Stop War & End Racism), the event started with a long list of speakers from various organisations including the US Labour Against War, Iraqi-American Anti-War Coalition, Jews for Peace in Palestine & Israel, Kids Against the War, Partnership for Civil Justice, Queers for Peace & Justice and the Support Network for Armed Forces.
Amongst prominent public figures present were Michigan congressman John Conyers and Reverend Jesse Jackson from the Clinton administration. Also present was Ramsey Clarke, former US Attorney General who is leading a case towards impeaching Bush for launching an “unconstitutional” pre-emptive war.
The crowd responded to Clarke with chants of “Vote to Impeach!”. The crowd and organisers also held strong that the core of the Middle East crisis is America’s biased policies towards Israel. Anti-Zionist sentiments soared even amongst Jews present as they condemned Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s aggressive settlement projects condoned by the US.
The protesters were also apprehensive about the military’s plan to use its latest 9,500kg satellite-guided Massive Ordinance Air Blast Bombs (MOAB) – also known as the Mother of All Bombs – in its “Shock & Awe” campaign that could cause mass destruction to the Iraqi people, 50 per cent of whom are below the age of 15. Many speakers consider this campaign an act of genocide. Rallying for peace, the crowd applauded the French and Germans for pursuing a more peaceful solution through disarmament by the Security Council. Strong opposition from major political players such as France, Russia and China further intensified anti-war sentiments amongst the protesters.
As I walked the compound of the Washington Monument, I saw people of all ages, colours and from all walks of life. It was heartening to see them making the effort to attend the rally.
It was especially moving to see so many Vietnam war veterans expressing their concerns about their country’s first-ever, pre-emptive war. These protesters considered themselves the United Nations of Peace, opposing the
US-led Coalition of the Willing.
The chant “No Blood for Oil!” reflects their scepticism of American-British intentions in Iraq.
Even though they all opposed Saddam, they do not think he is an imminent threat to the American homeland. Therefore, they demanded that funds used for military activities in the Arab region be used at home where jobs are scarce, Medicare ineffective and education budgets reduced.
However, taking this stand has caused war advocates to call them “traitors” for turning their backs on the President in times of crisis.
One day after Bush announced his ultimatum, public support increased slightly, as expected.
However, even as late as the first strikes on Iraq, the American public remains divided with at least 34 per cent opposing pre-emptive military action.
The morning after the war unfolded, Congress deliberated on a testimony of support for the President as Commander-in-Chief but some members in the House of Representative argued to dismiss any statement in the letter praising Bush’s leadership.
Families of 9/11’s victims also issued a statement condemning the war, saying that they do not want Iraqi civilians to experience the trauma of terror that they themselves have seen.
Furthermore, thousands in Boston, New York City, Chicago and San Francisco took to the streets for an emergency protest. Many made their statements clear carrying signs that read “We’re Not Against Our Soldiers! We Just Want Them To Come Home!”
Protesters also convened in Washington, D.C. causing massive traffic jams in areas around the White House. Many walked out of schools and workplaces in an organised “If The War Breaks Out, Walk Out!” peaceful act of civil disobedience.
Peace activists have planned to launch nationwide protests throughout the weekend and coming weeks if the war continues. Those who oppose the war consider themselves American patriots like those who spoke against King George in the American Revolution.
leave a comment