November 08, 2014

Robin Raphael’s illicit links with Taliban and Pakistan lobbyists


The US authorities have initiated inquiry against former US Diplomat Robin Raphel, who has been known for her expertise on Central Asia, including Pakistan and Afghanistan, for her alleged involvement with various extremist groups. Interestingly, in her entire 30 years of career with the US State Department, no one could make it out about her alleged interests. It is reportedly said that she has close connections with various Taliban factions. She presently serves as coordinator for non-military assistance to Pakistan, carrying on the work of the late Richard Holbrooke, whose AfPak team she joined in 2009.

Raphel was instrumental in orchestrating the decision of the State Department to open up diplomatic relations with the Taliban shortly after its takeover of Kabul. A second major policy directive that she  advocated and developed during her tenure was engagement with the Taliban. Her positions raised scorns at many occasions. Some reports however suggest that she had business interests with the Pakistan lobby in US.


According to recent news reports, Raphel's State Department office and home was searched and sealed. However, it's still unclear the investigations were directed towards. The officials said it is an ongoing investigation and no charges have been filed as yet, the reports further added.

Meanwhile, as reported, at the time of the raid, Raphel, was an adviser on Pakistan under a limited, renewable contract to the State Department's Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, where she administered nonmilitary aid and economic grants, CNN report said.
Robin Raphel – a former assistant secretary of state for South Asia and ambassador to Tunisia, spent much of her career working on Pakistan and South Asia. News that she was mainly working as a lobbyist came to the fore when the Indian Express published in November 2009 report said-

"The US decision to appoint Robin Raphel as coordinator for non-military aid to Pakistan has run into controversy over conflict of interest with latest disclosures from a lobbying firm where she worked earlier clearly stating that she had been an active lobbyist for Pakistan until a few days before her appointment."

The News, a Pakistani daily also carried a similar report titled, New lobbyist hired in DC as Kerry-Lugar row rages. The article says-

"The new company hired is Cassidy & Associates, one of the biggest lobbying firms in Washington in which Robin Raphael, the newly appointed coordinator of all aid to Pakistan, was a key partner until she got her new job recently."

Sources suggest, Robin Raphel once referred Pakistan as a "model, modern, moderate Muslim State." The report further quotes an official of Cassidy saying that the firm had been hired by the Pakistan Embassy for $700,000 a year plus expenses which can run into thousands of dollars, as seen in the past.

The Pakistan media report was also an indicator of how Raphel misused her powers and office for business interests and had also succeeded in hoodwinking and manipulate US authorities State Department norms to gain positions, as the Indian Express report stated. If proven, it is criminal to maneuver the nation's strategic policies that helped her get financial and business benefits and influence many lives of innocent people negatively.

Her State Department biography says she began her career as a CIA analyst before serving in the Foreign Service for 30 years. Robin Raphel retired from the State Department in 2005, but returned in 2009 to work as an advisor to the late Richard Holbrooke, appointed by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as the first special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Besides this,  Robin Raphel was seen in New Delhi as a catalyst for Washington "trafficking with India's enemies" as she was more in line with Sikh and Kashmiri seperatist

November 06, 2014

Shia Islam, Imam Ali, Najaf, Karbala and Moharrum

Gajendra singh

Islam and its influence, for good or bad is not going to go away any time soon.


The arid deserts of Arabia might have been 'Jahiliya' before the revelations of Islam  but the people right up to Morocco on the Atlantic coast in North Africa and Iraq, Persia, Khorasan and Central Asia up to the border of China had long religious and cultural streams and very well developed and complex religious traditions and beliefs.


Therefore Islam became varied, complex and evolved as have other religions. The pristine austere Arab Islam of the first four Caliphs, to which the Jihadis and others hark back to, has been changed ,uplifted ,evolved ,enriched and made  more beautiful and humanistic through interaction with cultural and religious base of various lands conquered by Islam, most of them had highly cultured civilizations.


The Byzantine civilisation in Syria and Damascus ( which also introduced the desert Arabs to veils, used by the high society Byzantine ladies), Persian civilisation in North Iraq , Persia and Central Asia, with their religions like Nestorian Christianity, Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, Shamanism etc contributed to the evolution and flowering of Islam in its various sects and forms. 


Both Persia and Central Asia had resisted Islamisation by force and accepted a version akin to their own culture and civilization.  Most of Central Asia, the subcontinent, certainly South East Asia was won over for Islam by humanistic Sufi saints with beliefs similar to that of the Absolute Reality of Brahman i.e. union of self with God (in South Asia) and Buddhist Nirvana (in Central Asia and elsewhere) and traders and not so much by military victories or Jihad and sword .This perception is sold and enhanced by militaristic Muslim and western historians. Wahabis and other orthodox Muslims have been strongly opposed to Sufi Islam throughout history.


Unfortunately, in spite of a millennia and half of Jihads and Crusades, Christian West and others take Islam as monolithic and Muslims as barbarians, especially because of some of the medieval customs and barbaric punishments in Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries. (As if starving half a million Iraqi children by Western embargo is not barbaric. US Presidents always talk of action against Iraq to protect their children and future generations! ) Muslims are equally ill informed about Christianity. Even Sunnis about Shias, Twelvers, Ismailis, Alevis, Alawites, Druzes and others. Qadianis and Ahmediyas are persecuted in Pakistan. Each has misperceptions about the other. As have various Christians sects about each other and Muslims. These misperceptions are exaggerated and exploited by politicians who use religion to acquire power and then to hold on to it.


In Saudi Arabia, home and focal point of Islam, behind the oil financed glitter, its polity remains medieval with its barbaric punishments against all contemporary human norms. In Iran, the focal point of Shia Islam, Iranians are more creative and constructive and barring some incongruities like Chador etc give education to its women and freedom to work and drive cars etc . Sooner than later, after the end of stranglehold of Mullahs, who had ensconced themselves by force into positions of power in spite of Ayatollah Khomeini, Iran could be an example to other Muslims.  On the other hand, ruling oligarchy of Saudi princes' life style, which according to Wahabi believers, who even took over the Mecca mosque in 1979, is at variance with the Wahabi percepts of Islam. This is a curious amalgam of two opposites united for sheer power sharing. But how long will it last! 


Let us begin with Muharram, Tazias and other Ashura rituals.


The Mourning of Muharram, or Muharram Observances, is a set of rituals associated with Shia Islam, which takes place in Muharram, the first month of the Islamic calendar. Many of the events associated with the ritual take place in congregation halls known as Hussainia.


The event marks the anniversary of the Battle of Karbala when Imam Hussein ibn Ali, the grandson of the Prophet Muhammad, and a Shia Imam, was killed by the forces of the second Umayyad caliph Yazid I at Karbala. Family members, accompanying Hussein ibn Ali, were killed or subjected to humiliation. The commemoration of the event during yearly mourning season, from first of Muharram to twentieth of Safar with Ashura comprising the focal date, serves to define Shia communal identity. At present, Muharram Observances are carried out in countries with noteworthy Shia population, including Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Lebanon, India, and Bahrain.


 The words Azadari (عزاداری) which mean mourning and lamentation; and Majalis-e Aza have been exclusively used in connection with the remembrance ceremonies for the martyrdom of Imam Hussain. Majalis-e Aza, also known as Aza-e Husayn, includes mourning congregations, lamentations, matam and all such actions which express the emotions of grief and above all, repulsion against what Yazid stood for.


According to Shia sources, The Azadari of Muharram was started by the family of Muhammad (the Ahl-ul-Bayt) after the death of Muhammad's grandson Husayn ibn Ali at the Battle of Karbala in 680 AD. Following the battle of Karbala, Muhammad's granddaughter Zaynab bint Ali and sister of Husayn, began mourning for the fallen and making speeches against Husayn ibn Ali's opponents: Ibn Ziyad and Yazid I. News of Husayn ibn Ali's death was also spread by Imam Zain-ul-Abideen, who succeeded Husayn as the Shia Imam, via sermons and speeches throughout Iraq, Syria and Hejaz.


Zainab and Zain-ul-Abideen informed the people that Yazid had martyred Imam Husayn and seventy-two of his companions including his six month old son Ali Asghar, and that their women and children were taken as prisoners to Syria. When word of mourning reached Yazid he decided to release the captive women and children from the prison in Damascus, out of fear of public revolt against his rule. He sent for Zain-ul-Abideen, informed him of the impending release and asked if he wished for anything further. Zain-ul-Abideen said he would consult with Zainab. She asked Yazid to provide a place where the people could mourn for Imam Husayn and others of Muhammad's household. A house was provided, and here Zaynab binte Ali held the first Majlis-e Aza of Husayn and started the Mourning of Muharram.


The mourning and commemoration for Husayn ibn Ali originated in Iraq, as this is where Husayn was martyred. However, they were held in Iran as early as the twelfth century, when both Sunnis and Shias participated in them. In the Safavid period, the annual mourning ceremonies for Imam Hosayn, combined with the ritual cursing of his enemies, acquired the status of a national institution. Expressions of grief such as sine-zani (beating the chest), zangir-zani (beating oneself with chains), and tage-zani or Qama Zani also known as Tatbeer (hitting oneself with swords or knives) emerged as common features of the proliferating mourning-processions (dasta-gardani). Mourning for the martyred Imam also takes place in assemblies held in buildings erected especially for the purpose, known either as Hussainia or takia, as well as in mosques and private houses.


In Lucknow, India, the Muharram processions and rituals are known as Azadari. The processions, including the Chup Tazia, have been observed since the sixteenth century or earlier, when Lucknow was capital of the state of Awadh. Many Shia also tend to embark on a pilgrimage to the Imam Husayn Shrine in Karbala itself, as it is one of the holiest places for Shias outside of Mecca and Medina. Up to one million pilgrims a year visit the city to observe the anniversary of Husayn ibn Ali's death.  The shrine is located opposite that of Abbas ibn Ali. One form of mourning is the theatrical re-enactment of the Battle of Karbala. In Iran this is called taziya or taziyeh. Theatrical groups that specialize in taziya are called taziya groups. Taziyas were popular through the Qajar dynasty until the early twentieth century, but the re-enactments slowly declined until they were mostly abandoned in the large cities by the early 1940s. Nonetheless, taziyas continued to exist in Iran on a smaller scale especially in more rural and traditional areas. Reza Shah, the first of the Pahlavi dynasty, had outlawed taziyas. Despite some attempts since 1979, Muharram processions and various forms of the rawza khani are still more common.


 In South Asia where dramatic commemorations are less significant, ta'zīya came to refer specifically to the miniature mausoleums used in processions held in Muharram. It all started from the fact that the great distance of India from Karbala prevented Indian Shi'is being buried near the tomb of Imam Husayn or making frequent pilgrimages(ziyarat) to the tomb. This is the reason why Indian Shi'is established local karbalas on the subcontinent by bringing soil from Karbala and sprinkling it on lots designated as future cemeteries. Once the karbalas were established on the subcontinent, the next step was to bring Husayn's tomb-shrine to India. This was established by building replicas of Husayn's mausoleum called ta'zīya to be carried in Muharram processions. Thousands of ta'zīyas in various shapes and sizes are fashioned every year for the months of mourning of Muharram and Safar; and are carried in processions and may be buried at the end of Ashura or Arbain.


 Though besides Sunnis several Shias do not know that it is a protest and invitation to people to come and listen to mourners as to what happened in Karbala. It is believed by some non-Shias that Hussain's journey to Karbala was to claim his Imamat over the people of Kufa who had written letters inviting him to Kufa whereas per Shia's belief Husain knew he was to be killed there. He undertook this journey to deny his approval or Bay'at to Yazid becoming caliph because he considered Yazid to be a danger to the Muslim Ummah and a threat to Islam. His sacrifice and revolution were to preserve Islam and his Grandfather's Ummah against the innovation, hypocrisy, wickedness as well as the attempts to destroy and alter Islam and the quest for worldly pleasures and worldly gains by Yazid and his people. It was a matter of right and wrong, just and unjust and Hussain chose what is just, despite the consequences.                    

History of Najaf

The history, myths and legends surrounding Najaf are as old as time .It is believed that Prophet Abraham who migrated from Ur in Iraq to Palestine via Harran (Turkey) once came to the village at Najaf with Prophet Isaac. When local people wanted them to settle down there, Abraham agreed, but only if the valley behind the village were sold for cultivation. When Prophet Isaac said that the land was neither fit for farming nor grazing, Abraham assured him that in future it would have a tomb and a shrine, and 70,000 people would gain entrance to Paradise and be able to intercede for many others. That prediction has come true with the tomb and shrine of Imam Ali erected there. Imam Ali once said about the valley, now the second largest cemetery in the world and a resting place for millions of Muslims, and called the Valley of Peace (Wadi-as-Salaam);

"This Valley of Peace is part of Heaven and that there is not a single one of the believers in the world, whether he dies in the East or West, but his soul will come to this Paradise to rest. As there is nothing hidden in this world from my eyes." Imam Ali then added, "I see all the believers seated here in groups and talking with one another."

According to another tradition, there was a mountain at Najaf, on which a son of Noah, refusing to get into the Ark, climbed up to see how high the water would rise. A revelation came to the mountain, "Do you undertake to protect this son of mine from punishment?" Lo, the mountain crumbled into pieces and Noah's son was drowned. In its place appeared a large river, but after a few years it dried up, so it is also called "Nay-Jaff", meaning, and "the dried river." Many Shiite also believe that Adam, the first Biblical man, is also buried at the mosque

Imam Ali was stabbed to death while praying at a mosque in Kufa. Following his instructions for the burial place, his followers tied the body to a camel and let it roam in the desert until it finally rested 11 kms north-east of Kufa, in Najaf, 60 kms south of Baghdad. But there are some who doubt if Ali's remains are really there as some traditions suggest that he was buried in Kufa and others that he was buried at Medina. Nevertheless, the vast majority of Shi'ites accept Najaf as Imam Ali's burial place and this is most important.

The first building was constructed by the Abbassid Caliph, Harun al Rashid. How he found this place is also another interesting tradition. More buildings were added later on a but some were destroyed too by anti- Shiite Sunnis. Under orders of anti Shi'ite Caliph Al Mutawakkil the Shrine was ploughed over in 850, but after his death a temporary Shrine was erected.

But it was the Shiite Buyid ruler ad –Dawla who constructed the first major Shrine building at Najaf in 979, which lasted till 1354. However, the current structure and buildings were built by Iran's Shiite Safavid Shah Safi in about 1635. It was Nadir Shah who got the dome gilded. The Wahhabis burnt down the dome in 1801 and Ottoman Najib Pasha attacked it 1843. But Sunni Ottoman Sultans, always at war with Shiite Safavids of Iran, gave considerable autonomy to Shiite enclaves of Najaf, Kufa and Kerbala.

When the sun shines on the golden tiles of the Shrine, its dome appears splendidly luminous, making it a glorious sight to behold. The mausoleum consists of one large central dome which stands out of a square-shaped ornate structure with two minarets. The predominant colour of' the exterior is gold, bright shining gold and the entire exterior of the mausoleum is inlaid with a mosaic pattern of light powder blue, white marble, gold again with an occasional splash of Middle East rust. Millions from all over the world flock to the shrine to pay their respects, to offer salutations and pray to Allah and seek Imam Ali's intercession. The author was very moved by the sense of piety, serenity and peace in the Shrine when he visited it in 1977. It is the same feeling in most religious shrines.

Najaf, an Islamic center

Over a millennia, Najaf has become the residence of many teachers, and many seminaries and colleges were established here, making it a major center for scientific, literary and theological studies for the Islamic world. A collection of many rare Islamic relics and precious gifts by rulers can be viewed here. Construction of Hindiyya canal in 1803 ushered in prosperity for the city. Pilgrim trade and that connected with bringing of dead bodies for burial made Najaf prosperous. The recent battles between as-Sadr's al- Mahdi militia and US troops also hurt pilgrim and burial trade. Control over Najaf brings prestige and wealth.

Four senior Grand Ayatollahs constitute the Religious Institution (al-Hawzah al-`Ilmiyyah) in Najaf, the pre-eminent seminary center for the training of Shiite clergymen. Before the 1979 Islamic revolution in Iran, it was the most important center of study for Shiite religious leaders. Following Saddam Hussein's oppression in 1980s and the expulsion of senior clerics, many shifted to Qum in Iran, which took over the religious leadership of the Shiites. In 1999, the Iraqi Shiite leader, Ayatollah Mohammad Sadiq al-Sadr, Moqtda's father was assassinated in Najaf, sparking clashes between the Shiites and the Iraqi government.

During his exile from Iran, Ayatollah Khomeini lived here (1964-78) prior to the 1979 revolution in Iran. Qum's pre-eminence is only since last 1979, while Najaf has a millennium long leadership. In mid-2003 the seminary in Qum hosted between 40,000 and 50,000 clergy, while the number in Najaf was about 2,000, down from 10,000 before the Ba'athist repression .The situation is changing.

There is a major difference between Najaf and Qum's concept of the Velayat-e-Faqih.  According to the latter it is a God given authority to the top religious leader to oversee secular affairs and as the infallible Imam, like Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, as the highest religious authority of the world's Shiites. The Najaf School does not interpret the Velayat-e-Faqih as meaning a direct intervention of clerics in politics. He should be a supervisor and adviser. So, Ali Sistani in Iraq refuses to wield temporal power but Moqtda's views are closer to that of Ayatollah Khomeini.

Caliphate of Imam Ali and Schism in Islam

In the Muslim community (Ummah) of over a billion faithfuls spread all over the world nearly 12 % are Shiites. Majority of Shiites are Twelvers – believers in 12 Imams (like Iran), but there are others too, like the Ismailis (of Agha Khans, Mohammed Ali Jinnah), from whom emerged the "Assassins" in early 2nd millennium, Alevis in Turkey, ruling Alawite regime in Syria, and Hezbollah and Amal in Lebanon and some very extremist groups. Nearly 60% of Iraqis are Shiites, the rest are mostly Sunnis.

The Shiites emerged out of seeds of disunity in the embryonic Muslim Ummah which were sown as soon as Prophet Mohammed lay dead in Medina. While his cousin and son in law Ali and the family were preparing the body for the burial, another clan of the Quraysh tribe elected Abu Bakr as the first Caliph- Prophet's deputy, countering the claims of Ansars of Medina, who had welcomed the Prophet during his Hijra .Abu Bakr's supporters said that he was closer to Mohammed, one of the very first converts to Islam and was from Mecca's Quraysh tribe. His daughter A'isha was wedded to the Prophet.

According to Shiites, Prophet Mohammed had given enough indications for Ali to be his successor and cite many hadiths in support of this claim. The Prophet had lived with his uncle Abu Talib, Ali's father and Mohammed's only child Fatimah was married to Ali .Ali also became Muslim before Abu Bakr and was perhaps his most trusted and the closest companion, even though he was about 3 decades younger than the Prophet.

Ali's election as the Caliph would have denied the chance to the older generation of power brokers, so they played politics and got their way. Ali was overlooked twice with Omar and Uthman succeeding Abu Bakr in cleverly planned successions to keep Ali out. As a result Ali mostly kept himself away and aloof.

Following the murder of Uthman, Ali was invited by the Muslims of Medina to accept the caliphate; reluctant, he agreed only after long hesitation. His brief reign was marked by difficulties of inheriting corrupt state of affairs, where the Quran and the traditions of Mohammed were neglected .Ali based his rule on the Islamic ideals of social justice and equality which clashed with the interests of the Quraysh aristocracy of Mecca grown rich through the Muslim conquests. A rebellion was instigated against him .Ali was victorious in many wars, but was forced into a trap of arbitration. He was assassinated by a Kharijite and Mu'awiya of the Umayyads established the dynasty at Damascus.

Ali was a devout Muslim with an outstanding reputation for justice, unlike Othman or the Umayyad dynasty that followed him, mired in nepotism with worldly and autocratic ways. Many Muslims feel this way about the Umayyad Caliphs except for Omar II. To many it was a betrayal of the Quran, which insists that the first duty of Muslims is to create a just and equal society.

Those opposed to Umayyads called themselves the Shia't-Ali (Ali's partisans) and developed a doctrine of piety and protest, refusing to accept the Umayyad caliphs, and regarded Ali's descendants as the true leaders of the Muslim community. This schism became an unbridgeable chasm and remains so, when in 680, Shiites of Kufa called for the rule by Ali's second son Hussein and invited him. Hussein set out for Iraq with a small band of relatives and followers (72 armed men and women and children) in the belief that the spectacle of the Prophet's family, marching to confront the Caliph, would remind the regime of its social responsibility.

But Umayyad Caliph Yazid dispatched his army, which slaughtered Hussein and most of his followers on the plain of Karbala with Imam Hussein being the last to die, holding his infant son in his arms. This event is now commemorated as Muharram.  For Shiites that tragedy symbolizes the chronic injustice that pervades human life. Shiite Islam provides spiritual solace and shelter for the poorest and the deprived among the Muslims, as in as- Sadr city near to Baghdad. In almost all Sunni majority countries Shiites are ill treated and persecuted.

Imagery and this passion informed Khomeini's Iranian revolution, which many experienced as a re-enactment of Karbala - with the Shah Reza Pehlavi cast as a latter day Yazid. The recent attempts to attack Shiites in Iraq by US forces with support from puppet Allawi regime would fit into that imagery.

There is no agreement among Muslims on the Caliphs. Shiites do not recognise the first three and in many places curse them. For them Ali is the first rightful Caliph and Imam. For Sunnis, Imam is only a prayer leader and could be any one. But for the Shiites, he is a spiritual leader with the divine spark and juris-consult (Vilayet-el-Faqih) .The sacred Islamic law Sharia enacted under different situations and times has many schools among Sunnis, who unlike the Shiites have closed ijtihad, independent reasoning in Islamic Law to meet new situations .The Shiites Iranians (Aryans) perhaps created the office of Imam (like Shankracharya among Indo –Aryan Brahmins) as only an Arab from the Quraysh tribe could become a Caliph. Later when Turks, who came as slaves / warriors to Arab lands, captured power by the sword, raised a minor office of the Sultan to a powerful one, protector by now of a powerles! S Caliph. Then Ottoman Sultans appropriated the title of Caliph for themselves.

After the first dynastic Umayyad caliphate based in Damascus ended, another branch of Quraysh tribe, Abbasids took over and shifted to Iraq in 750, but after making false promises of installing the Prophet's family as the Caliph. Muslim Ummah's unity under the Sunni Caliph was finally broken when Fatimids anointed their own Caliph first in Tunisia, then in Egypt in 10th century. So an Umayyad prince in Cordoba too declared himself the third Caliph.

Muslims now gather under the umbrella of Organisation of Islamic Conferences (OIC), constituted after the 1969 fire in Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem.

Evolution of Shiism:

We should be clear about two things.  Firstly, political Shi'ism which indicates a belief that members of the Hashim clan in the Quraysh tribe are the people most worthy of holding political authority in the Islamic community, but no belief in any particular religious position for the family.  As for religious Shi'ism, it is about the belief that some particular members of the house of Hashim were in receipt of divine inspiration and are thus the channel of God's guidance to men whether or not they hold any defacto political authority. This was augmented by the Iranians who believe in the tradition that the mother of fourth Imam Zaynul- Abdin was Shahrbanu, the daughter of Yazdigird, the last Sasanian King of Iran.

From the very beginning all the Shiite Imams, descendants of Ali, every single one was imprisoned, exiled or executed or poisoned by the Caliphs, who could not tolerate an alternative centre to their rule. So by 8th century, most Shiites held aloof from politics and concentrated on the mystical interpretation of scripture. Says Karen Armstrong" Long before western philosophers called for the separation of church and state, Shias had privatised faith, convinced that it was impossible to integrate the religious imperative with the grim world of politics that seemed murderously antagonistic to it. --

"The separation of religion and politics remains deeply embedded in the Shia psyche. It springs not simply from malaise, but from a divine discontent with the state of the Muslim community. Even in Iran, which became a Shia country in the early 16th century, the ulama (the religious scholars) refused public office, adopted an oppositional stance to the state, and formed an alternative establishment that - implicitly or explicitly - challenged the shahs on behalf of the people."

The picture of early Shi'ism was created (as not much is available from records) from the point of view of Twelver Shiite, ignoring the Ismalis, Mutazilites or orthodox Sunnis.  Modern scholars believe that this picture was retrospectively imposed over the facts by historians of 3rd and 4th Islamic century for doctrinal reasons.

It is only after 6th Imam Jafar as-Sadiq (died 765) that there is any firm evidence that any kind of religious leadership was being claimed for Twelver Imams. He was a well-known and influential figure in the Islamic world. Several of his students later became prominent jurists and traditionalists even among non-Shi'ite Muslims. Jafar as-Sadiq did not make an open claim to religious leadership, but his circle of students evidently looked to him as Imam, some including leading figures such as Abu'l-Khattab, who held beliefs of a ghuluww (extremist) nature regarding him, indicating that as-Sadiq was a focus of religious speculation and leadership in his own time.

Evolution of Islam into Shiite and other forms:

The number of ghulat groups, increased dramatically especially in Kufa during as-Sadiq's lifetime. It is therefore useful to consider the origin of the ghulat. When the Arabs arrived in the Fertile Crescent, they encountered ancient civilisations with sophisticated religious systems. Iraq was already the centre of intense religious ferment with the ancient Babylonian religious systems, Zoroastrianism, Mazdaism, Manichaeism, Judaism and various forms of Christianity contributing to a kaleidoscope of religious view points, debate and speculation. Islam by comparison was as yet simple and undeveloped. And with the Prophet already dead, there was no one to whom the Muslims could turn for an authoritative ruling on sophisticated religious speculations being posed by the ancient civilisations. There arose a ferment of discussion around some of the concepts introduced by these older religions and philosophical systems.

In the initial years the Arabs lived in their military camp cities and avoided intermingling with the native population and disturbing religious speculations but as more of the native population embraced Islam, such discussions increased. In this spiritual and religious ferment ideas were injected into the Muslim community and intensively discussed by people interested in such matters which could be considered by the majority of Muslims heterodox concepts and called ghulat or extremists.            

Among the ideas injected were such concepts as tanasukh (transmigration of souls), ghayba (occultation), raj'a (return), hulul (descent of the Spirit of God into man), imama (Imamate, divinely-inspired leadership and guidance), tashbih (anthropomorphism with respect to God), tafwid (delegation of God's powers to other than God), and bada (alteration in God's will). But the ghulat needed a priest-god figure onto which to project their ideas of hulul, ghayba, etc., a role admirably suited to the persona of' Ali.

While the ghulat adopted Ali and his family as the embodiment of their religious speculation the Shi'ite of'Ali always looked on the ghulat with a certain amount of suspicion. However, the martyrdom of Hussein and the pathos of this event gave the family of Ali a cultic significance. It bestowed on Shiites, earlier primarily a political party, a thrust into a religious orientation directing it firmly towards the ghulat, and giving the ghulat milieu a hero-martyr and a priestly family with which they could associate much of their speculations.

Mosque and tombs

The word mosque itself derives from the Arabic masjid, "a place where one prostrates one's self (in front of God)." In earliest times any place could be used for private prayer with correct direction (qiblah, originally Jerusalem, but soon after Mecca). The collective prayer on Fridays, with a collective swearing of allegiance to the community's leadership also strengthens common bonds among all members of the Ummah.

According to some experts, the Quran does not utter a word for or against the representation of living things. But from about the middle of the 8th century a prohibition was formally stated .It became a standard feature of Islamic thought, even though the form in which it was expressed varied from absolute to partial. It has been suggested that Islam developed this attitude when it came into contact with other cultures and it was felt that the dreaded idol worship might return. The Qur'an (Sura ix, 31) prohibits the veneration of holy men and saints. In early Islam there was no special embellishment of funerary sites; 'the tombs of the rich and poor are! alike'. But the human desire to venerate and by many to be venerated is too old and deep rooted. The first changes occurred through veneration of the tombs of holy persons.

It appears that the construction of commemorative buildings over certain burial places began in the late 9th and 10th centuries especially over those of Shi'ite saints. Then over the tombs, mostly in Iran and Central Asia, of rulers of marginal or semi-independent regions, who often followed non-Sunni beliefs? T hey were to project status symbols of secular power and were rather ambitious .In contrast, the tombs of holy men were simpler – which went towards satisfying the devotional needs of the population. Generally complex ensembles grew up around the tombs of many saints, like that of the mystic Sufi poet Jalal ud-Din Rumi, in Konya, or of Bayazid, in Bistam (1313).

Therefore the earliest surviving tombs belong to Shi'ite persona; the shrine of Fatima, sister of the Imam 'Ali ar-Rida at Qum, and that of the Imam Ali in Najaf. The earliest rulers' tombs are of 'Abbasid Caliphs al-Muntasir (in Samarra in 862), al-Mu'tazz and al-Mohtadi (built as a domed square building enclosed in an octagonal ambulatory) and are better preserved. A feature of royalty mausoleums was its concentration, like the Timurid Shah-i Zinda ensemble in Samarqand of 14th and 15th centuries or the Mamluk tombs of Cairo.

Mausoleums were also built to commemorate Biblical persons, companions of the Prophet and scholars, popular heroes and ghazis (fighters for the Faith). From 12th century secular mauso­leums proliferated all over the world, in Egypt and Central Asia, northern and north-eastern Iran and Anatolia, and also in India and North Africa. They continue to be built, both for spiritual and secular leaders e.g., Firdausi, Avicenna, Umar Khayya m, the late Agha Khan and the poet-philosopher Iqbal, and particularly im­posing structures for Riza Shah Pahlavl, Ataturk and Mohammed Ali Jinnah.

The mausoleum of the Samanids in Bukhara, commonly referred to as the Tomb of Isma'il, was constructed before 943 and consists of a square structure with a large central dome and four small corner ones set over a gallery. Especially noteworthy is the use of bricks to create different pat­terns in its various parts.

Then of course there are the famous imperial Moghul mausoleums, of Humayun (d. 1556) in Delhi, built of red sandstone and white marble; and the marvel in marble, the Taj Mahal, built in Agra by Emperor Shah Jehan for his favourite queen Mumtaz Mahal. The mausoleum of Akbar (d. 1605) is at Sikandra, and of his son Jehangir (d1627) near Lahore. The word mausoleum comes from the structure built in Asia Minor (Bodrum -Western Turkey) for an Asian ruler, Mausolus by his Queen, around the time Alexander the Great passed that way.

Influence of Buddhism on Islam and veneration of holy men;

Throughout history, there was natural interaction through migration and conquest, travel and trade, between the Fertile Crescent, Asia Minor, Persia, Khorasan and Central Asia and Hindustan. Alexander the Macedonian went up to Bukhara and then North West Hindustan. Earlier some Indo- Aryan tribes like Mitannis had migrated from Eurasian steppes and ruled in upper Mesopotamia.  Then the Arab armies marched north east and conquered areas up to the steppes. Then the Turkish tribes marched from eastern Asian steppes to Persia! and Turkey (and the Indian sub-continent). Then came Chengiz Khan and the Mongol hordes.

Culturally, linguistically, ethnically and spiritually there is no area in the world that has so much in common as that formed by the regions connecting the river basins of Euphrates, Tigris; Amu and Syr Darya: Indus and the Ganges. This is an area with a continuous history and cradle of most civilizations and religions; Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism, Sikhism, Zoroastrianism, Manichaeism, Judaism and Christianity and Islam and their variations. The intermingling of Semitic, Indo-Iranian and Ural- Altaic languages with local languages produced a mosaic of new languages and tongues.

Influence of Buddhism in Central Asia perhaps started from the time of Greek King Menander in Bactria. During the rule of Kushana Emperor Kanishka (who was converted to Buddhism) from Peshawar, not only traders but also religious teachers moved freely throughout his Empire which then encompassed today's Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan and Xinjiang, Pakistan and Northern India and laid the foundations for the spread of Buddhism. Earlier Asoka had undertaken energetic steps to spread the Dhamma, but his efforts were more successful in South East Asia and Ceylon. Buddhism was taken to Central Asia either directly or via Tibet or Eastern Turkestan (Xinjiang) where wit! h little competition, it was easily accepted . But it was not so in Sogdiana and around it, where Zoroastrians were well entrenched, later came followers of Manichaeism and Nestorian Christians. Conquerors (and traders) spread their religions, but they were also influenced by the cultures and the creeds of the ruled.

To begin within Buddhism symbols represented Buddha and Tantras. Sculpture representing Buddha in human form is a Greek contribution through Gandhara art from Afghanistan. Starting from Bactria, Buddhism evolved the concept of Bodhhisatva Maitreya as incarnations for attaining Nirvana and return to guide and help the laity. This universal and secular religion found favour with Central Asian Turks and Mongols (also Uighurs in Xinjiang) when it reached there.

Influence of Viharas and Stupas on darghas and khankahs in Central Asia

Excavations have revealed Viharas and Stupas all over eastern Turkistan, up to Bukhara and into Turkmenistan. To begin with, Stupas were built to keep sacred relics (of Buddha and some of his disciples) although Buddha himself was against such practices. Later Stupas became associated with the symbols of remains of saints and cemeteries. The respect and veneration is based more on Aryan belief in Brahman or the Reality (Universal Soul) and Atman (individual Soul) with the saints having achieved the Union with the Reality. Prophet Mohammed had underlined that God and man are different. (Christians have still not resolved this dilemma fully). Miracles and veneration of dead persons are denounced in Quran (Sura XI, 31).

Stupas started as simple structures, as in Sanchi in Central India (1st or 2nd Cent BC) with a semi-spherical dome for the remains, fenced by a wall and 4 entrances and a Chhatri (umbrella symbolising the Lord and the Sovereign). Later a raised square platform was added under the dome with the structures then becoming more complex and sophisticated, adorned with sculptures like Bamiyan Buddhas and paintings (some times in caves i.e. in Ajanta and Barhaut in India). Viharas are monasteries with cells constructed around a court yard, with Stupa in the middle, for monks to stay during the heavy Indian monsoon rains. Normally the monks were not to attach themselves to any fixed place.

With the spread of Buddhism Central Asians including Turks and Mongols adopted and assimilated phrases from Buddhism i.e. Sanskrit and Pali words like Nirvana =Nirvana (Nibanna), Dhamma =Dharma, Cindan =Chandan (sandalwood), used for funerary ceremony, Aratna =Ratan, Stup =Stupa, Mandal= Mandala, Chakra= Chakra, Bodhistava =Bodhistav, Bakshi (accountant)=Bhikku /Bhikshu (because a Bhikshu once did accounts for the Mongols) etc.

An excavation in 1930s at Moghoki Attar mosque in Bukhara, perhaps the oldest surviving mosque in Central Asia, revealed under it ruins of a Zoroastrian temple destroyed by Arabs and an earlier Buddhist temple beneath it. The name Bukhara itself perhaps derives from Vihara. (Tashkent could be from Tashkhund; region of stones in Sanskrit). There are many ruins of Viharas and Stupas in Termez on Amu Darya (Uzbekistan), Merv (Turkmenistan), Afrasiab (Samarkand), Khojand etc in Ferghana valley and around Lake Issik Kul in Kyrgyzstan .Of course in Eastern Turkistan (and Tibet) apart from the ruins, many thousand old Buddhist manuscripts (300 pages found in Merv too) and books were recovered. Buddhist paintings have also been found in Afrasiab and elsewhere in Central Asia. It is not a simple coincidence that after Islam's arrival all these places became centres of Sufi Islam. From Stupas and Viharas have perh! aps emerged sacred tombs, khankahs, darghas and madarsas.

Tombs were not popular in Arab heartland around Saudi Arabia. But the Persian, Turkish, Asian and African, even Berber Muslims accepted Pirs, Calandars, Sheikhs, Babas, Dervishes and others and their tombs became places of worship. Freedom loving eclectic nomads and others resisted Arab warriors in Sogdiana and Central Asia and their still austere Islam. It was only the modified, personalised and spiritual Islam of Persian Samanids based in Bukhara (Ismail's tomb looks like a simple Stupa) that was first accepted by Turks and others in Central Asia .To Islam had been added strands of local religions and beliefs .It is this form of Islam that was spread in India mostly by Sufi saints, but also by forced conversions or inducements.

Sufism developed fully by 12th century by which time Arab Islam had been modified and enriched by streams from Persian, Central Asian and other religions, beliefs and philosophies .It was in the heartland of Arab Islam ie Baghdad and Allepo, where Sufis saints Al Hajj (for insisting " Ana Al-haq "-I am the Truth) and Suhrawardi were martyred. Because of Sunni hostility tombs were erected much after the martyrdom of Imam Ali and Imam Hussein in Najaf and Karbala. The Wahhabis, Salafis remain deadly opposed to Sufism.

The major Sufi Tariqas had central Asian origin or influence i.e., Qadiriyas, Nakshabandis (many current Turkish leaders are its adherents), Rumi's dervishes, Bektashis, the patron saint of non-Turkish (mostly Slav), non- Muslim born Janissary corps and top Administrators of the Ottoman Empire based on devshirme system. Turkey's Shia Alevis' faith (majority from Turkmen Oghuz tribes) has strands from Christian, Shaman and other beliefs.

Intermingling of beliefs and faiths;

Human wish to comprehend and experience the Reality is as old as the natural talent to transcend beyond oneself, until this faculty was dimmed by technological afflictions. There are glimpses of it in earliest Aryan writings like Vedas and Avestan, even among Greek philosophers like Orpheus, Pythagoras, Socrates and others .So the environment and tools existed before formal religions evolved or were revealed.

Buddha himself went through the whole gamut of experiments and meditations including Jain like austerities, Hindu systems before attaining Nirvana. And his path and method of meditation were modified in east India, Tibet, China and Japan. If Buddhism influenced the evolution of Sufi Islam then Buddhism itself was influenced earlier by other religions and practices.

Indo-Iranian religion Mithraism flowered between the 2nd and 4th centuries in the Roman world and became very popular among the Roman aristocracy, military leaders and soldiers, traders and slaves with powerful patrons among Roman emperors, like Commodus, Septimium Severus, Caraculla and others. Diocletian built a temple for Mithra near Vienna on Danube as "the Protector of the Empire". He was the god of Light and Sun, contract, loyalty and justice. Celebrations for Mithra's birthday on December 25, the sun's solstice, was so popular in the Asia that Christmas had to be shifted to this day from January 6 to make it acceptable among the masses. Christianity also took over many of the rituals and symbols of Mithraism, like baptism, resurrection and prayers to honor the Sun.

India's Sikh religion also known as gurmat, the teachings of the guru, founded by guru Nanak (1469-1539), combines many elements of Hinduism and Islam. Guru Nanak believed that one could come close to the God through meditation and devotion .God is the true guru and his divine word has come to the humanity through the 10 historical gurus. Their sacred scripture Adi Granth is also called "Guru Granth Saheb ". The Sikh temples are known as gurdwaras, Guru's door. Many Shi'ites Ghulat groups believe that Ali and the Imams are doors to God. When the Sunni Moghul emperors persecuted the Sikhs and their gurus, Sikh religion took to militancy and those who died for the panth ( gurus' path) became martyrs.

Human beings have evolved many paths to the Reality ie various Yoga systems; Tibetan, Zen, Vipassana and other Buddhist Margs, Jewish Kabbalah, Christian Hesychasm, Gurdjief way, Sufi Tariqas and Transcendental Meditation (TM) in modern times for spiritually challenged materialists. The masses accept what the saints and holy men they trust teach them.

(K Gajendra Singh, served as Indian Ambassador to Turkey and Azerbaijan in 1992-96. Prior to that, he served as ambassador to Jordan (during the 1990-91 Gulf war), Romania and Senegal.  He is currently chairman of the Foundation for Indo-Turkic Studies.

Pentagon: Pakistan Uses 'Proxy Forces' in India and Afghanistan

An October 2014 Pentagon report calls out Pakistan for its use of terrorist proxies in India and Afghanistan.

By Ankit Panda

November 06, 2014

The Pentagon released a report earlier this week that directly condemns Pakistan for its use of terrorist proxies against India. The report, titled "Progress Toward Security and Stability in Afghanistan," is atypically candid and is intended for consumption by U.S. legislators. While a growing chorus of experts and former officials in the United States has remarked that the U.S.-Pakistan bilateral relationship is sliding into dysfunction and delusion, the U.S. government has generally kept things civil, refraining from overtly condemning Pakistan. U.S. officials, however, have long privately acknowledged Pakistan's support of anti-India militant groups. Most notably, the United States' former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Michael Mullen, testified that Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence had links to the Haqqani Network.

India, naturally, applauded the release of the report. The Indian Ministry of External Affairs remarked, "If the international community is saying Pakistan is using terrorists as proxies to counter Indian army then its welcoming [sic]. Issue of terrorism should not be segmented." As one report in The Hindu noted, the release of this report following Narendra Modi's visit to the United States could signal a coming rapprochement between the United States and India. Historically, Indian officials have remained skeptical of the United States given its long term support — both rhetorically and materially — for Pakistan. By acknowledging Pakistan's use of terrorist proxies, U.S. officials are saying what Indians have long waited to hear. Amid worsening relations between India and Pakistan in recent weeks, the report will likely reverberate in both India and Pakistan.

Earlier this year, in a speech in Kashmir, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi slammed Pakistan for its use of proxies against India. Specifically, Modi said Pakistan "has lost the strength to fight a conventional war, but continues to engage in the proxy war of terrorism." Given Modi's comments and this Pentagon report, it appears that both the United States and India are starting to arrive at a common understanding of Pakistan's use of proxy groups.

The report also acknowledges the Pakistan's role as an inhibitor for stability in Afghanistan — a significant admission ahead of the United States' military withdrawal from that country at the end of this year. The report praises India's role in aiding Afghan reconstruction as well.

Pakistani officials were unequivocal in their condemnation of the report. The Pakistan Foreign Office released a statement noting that "the Government of Pakistan takes serious exception to comments contained in the U.S. Department of Defense report sent to the Congress under the title 'Progress Towards Security and Stability in Afghanistan'." "While noting Pakistan's cooperation with the U.S. in areas of mutual interests, the recently-released report also carries unsubstantiated allegations of the existence of terrorist 'sanctuaries' or that proxy forces are operating from here against Afghanistan and India," it added. "Such allegations are of particular concern at this point when Pakistan government has launched comprehensive operations against militants in North Waziristan. The military operation 'Zarb-e-Azb' has been broadly welcomed internationally, including in the U.S.," the report continued.

The entire report is available at the U.S. Department of Defense website. I've excerpted some revealing passages here.

Afghan- and Indian- focused militants continue to operate from Pakistan territory to the detriment of Afghan and regional stability. Pakistan uses these proxy forces to hedge against the loss of influence in Afghanistan and to counter India's superior military. These relationships run counter to Pakistan's public commitment to support Afghan-led reconciliation. Such groups continue to act as the primary irritant in Afghan-Pakistan bilateral relations.

The report implies that the timing of a Lashkar-e-Taiba attack on the Indian consulate in Herat was tied to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's swearing in:

In May of this reporting period, the Indian consulate in Herat Province was attacked by a group of four heavily armed militants. The attack came three days prior to the swearing in of the new Indian Prime Minister, Narendra Modi.

On the Indian role in Afghanistan:

India supports a variety of high-visibility projects and initiatives in Afghanistan. These ventures are focused primarily on major infrastructure projects, including electricity generation and transmission, road construction, and mining. India has shown increased interest in Afghan security assistance, though activities in this area remain limited. India currently offers India-based training to ANSF personnel across a number of specialties, and the Indian government committed to expand this program. India does not provide direct military support or training in Afghanistan.

On Pakistan's role in Afghanistan:

However, suspicion has surrounded the relationship between Kabul and Islamabad, inhibiting bilateral cooperation on border security protocols. It is possible that the new Afghan President, Dr. Ghani, will seek to change this dynamic, which Pakistan is likely to welcome. Although stability in Afghanistan is in the interest of Pakistan, Pakistan also seeks sufficient Pashtun representation in the Afghan government to prevent Pashtun discontent along the Afghan-Pakistan border and limit India's influence.

The report might make for a refreshing read coming from U.S. government offices, but don't expect it to affect policy.

Traveling Through Multiple Europes

Geopolitical Weekly
 Tuesday, November 4, 2014 - 03:00  



By Adriano Bosoni

Europe is overcrowded with people and with nations. Six decades ago, the need to suppress the dangerous forces of nationalism led to the unprecedented political, economic and social experiment now known as the European Union. The hundreds of thousands of EU citizens working across the Continent and the lack of border controls between member states show that the experiment has been successful in many ways. However, rising nationalism, pervasively high unemployment and a growing sense of frustration with governing elites also highlight the serious limitations of the European project. Over the past 12 months, I have traveled extensively throughout Europe, observing firsthand how the global economic crisis is reawakening dormant trends along the Continent's traditional fault lines.

The crisis is having an uneven effect on EU member states because the eurozone locks countries with different levels of economic development into the same currency union. Europe's geography helps explain these differences: Countries in the south have traditionally dealt with high capital costs and low capital-generation capacity, while countries in the north have seen the opposite.

In December, I drove from Barcelona to Madrid. The endless succession of mountains along the route encapsulates Spain's traditional struggle against geography: Merely moving people and goods from point to point on the Iberian Peninsula has always posed formidable challenges for governments and traders. This rugged geography also led to the development of small pockets of populations with strong national identities, creating tension between Madrid and the Basque Country as well as Catalonia. Spain has traditionally been a resource-poor country that has had to look to the Atlantic to find wealth while frequently resorting to violence to secure unity.

In contrast, most of Germany is flat. In May, I drove north along the Rhine, one of the country's major economic arteries. The river and its tributaries have blessed all of the people living near them, bringing incalculable wealth to trading cities such as Frankfurt and Cologne. The same holds true for the two other major German waterways, the Elbe and the Danube. But wealth does not necessarily mean peace. Both sides of the Rhine host multiple castles and fortifications, a reminder of the state of fragmentation that defined the Germanic world for centuries. The lack of any real physical borders to the east and west also helps explain Germany's historical conflict with its neighbors.

Highways in Spain and Germany highlight a more significant difference. During my journey between Barcelona and Madrid, I barely saw any cars, let alone trucks. At times, it was hard to believe I was traveling between the two major cities in the eurozone's fourth-largest economy. By contrast, Germany's autobahns are crowded with vehicles going from one point to another. The same geography that made Germany a place of conflict also explains its economic power: Germany is the center of Europe from almost every possible point of view.

The farther one moves from Germany, the more evident the crisis becomes. Traveling by train from Thessaloniki to Athens lets one see Greece's complex geography firsthand. Greece is a rugged country with narrow coastal plains that swiftly give way to mountains. Complicating matters, the country has some 6,000 islands and islets, only a handful of which are inhabited. Greece's extremely fragmented geography and its strategic position on the eastern Mediterranean helps explain why it has struggled throughout history to get anything done. Developing an integrated economy and collecting taxes has proven difficult, especially while repelling a never-ending series of invasions.

Walking down the streets of Athens reveals that this is where the crisis struck first and has had the deepest impact. The city's downtown is full of closed shops with broken windows, graffiti and other signs of long-term neglect. In Athens, I saw far more police than in any other major European city. But at no time did I feel unsafe. Police are not out in force because of crime but because of social unrest. Though Greece is relatively tranquil these days, the social situation is still a ticking time bomb.

At the other end of the Continent, Portugal looks similar. I arrived in early October, excited by recent figures showing a drop in unemployment and an improvement in the economic outlook. What I found, however, was a place where only tourism seemed to be working while everything else remained static. Lisbon and Oporto are bittersweet places where magnificent monuments and spectacular views coexist with poverty and economic depression. Though Lisbon ended its rescue program with the European Union and International Monetary Fund early this year, for many Portuguese, life remains hard.

Talking Politics Across the Continent

Whenever I'm in a foreign country, I make an effort to visit bookstores because the books people read and write offer insights into the social mood. Bookstores in Southern Europe are a reminder that the Continent's economic problems have become political ones too. The gap between voters and traditional elites keeps widening as people are becoming increasingly tired of the policies designed by Brussels and backed by domestic politicians.

Perusing the shelves, I saw numerous books with significant anti-austerity and anti-establishment themes, which in some cases took an anti-German flavor. In an Oporto bookstore, among the bestsellers was a book called We Are Not Germans, while a Rome bookstore had a book called It's Not Worth a Lira, a plea to leave the euro and return to Italy's old currency, that appeared to be quite popular.

Southern Europeans fear and admire Germany at the same time. On one hand, Germany is seen as a country where everything works and governments are efficient. On the other hand, it is also seen as a hegemon that doesn't understand or care about the situation in the nations it is trying to lead.

Europe's economic crisis is particularly puzzling for the center-left. Social Democrats have traditionally embraced the process of European integration because it offers economic prosperity based on big welfare states and strong labor legislation. But this model is in crisis in many countries, and even center-left governments are applying spending cuts under pressure from the European Union.

In Italy, I had dinner with a former union leader as the center-left's Matteo Renzi -- who had just been appointed prime minister -- was proposing reforms in several areas, including labor. "I don't like the direction Renzi is going," the former union leader told me, "but I will vote for the Democratic Party again because it's either them or the (anti-system) Five Star Movement." While conservative forces are moving to the right and nationalist forces are gaining strength, the center-left is going through an identity crisis that is generating frictions within the parties and confusing their traditional voters -- something French President Francois Hollande is learning the hard way.

In Athens, a journalist told me she did not share the views of the neo-Nazi Golden Dawn party, but at least it had never been involved in a corruption scandal like those that have traditionally surrounded the country's mainstream parties. Along with the concept of democracy, Ancient Greece also developed the concept of kleptocracy. Whenever you talk with Greeks about politics, a word comes to their mouths almost immediately: "kleptes," which literally means "thieves." Most Southern Europeans have similar views of their governments. And while there is a big gap between what people say in conversations and the way they vote, these anti-establishment sentiments are not going away anytime soon -- and will keep threatening the survival of the European Union.

A Continent of Expatriates

While the economic and political impact of the crisis is evident in Southern Europe, its demographic consequences will take longer to be noticed but will probably be deeper. Before the current downturn, these countries had some of the lowest fertility rates in Europe, which, combined with rising life expectancy, led to an aging and shrinking population. The crisis made things worse because it generated high waves of emigration.

In the short run, emigration helps reduce the pain of the crisis because there are fewer people competing for jobs and more people sending remittances home. In the long run, however, it creates fiscal and economic challenges for the countries that see a decline in their labor forces. The economic crisis is returning Southern European countries to their traditional roles as places of emigration, where the young leave and the old are left behind.

But emigration is also problematic for the receiving countries. The rising number of refugees coming from Northern Africa and the Middle East is generating concerns in countries including Spain and Italy as well as Austria and Sweden. At the same time, immigrants from Eastern Europe are pushing Germany and the United Kingdom to find bureaucratic means to discourage them. In early January, an old lady in Frankfurt asked me where I was from. When I told her I was Argentinian-Italian, she smiled at me. She thought about her words and, after a while, said, "Italians are fine. It's Romanians and Bulgarians I'm worried about."

The irony is that the same process that is creating political and social tensions in Europe's core is helping to mitigate the negative effects of a demographic change. In Germany, I met many expatriates from across Europe, most of whom work at English-speaking companies with large Pan-European staffs. European enterprises can pick their employees from a pool of highly skilled workers from across the Continent without having to file significant amounts of paperwork. While the pressure to limit immigration is gaining momentum in Europe, I also expect businessmen to fight it.

The View From Outside the Eurozone

The economic crisis is not only leading to friction within the eurozone, it's also fragmenting the wider European Union. With Europe's main powers focused on the problems within the currency union, many of the newest EU members are feeling isolated. The re-emergence of a more aggressive Russia is complicating matters for these new members.

Of all the places I visited this year, Poland is probably the most interesting for the simple reason that its concerns are different from those of Western Europe. I visited Warsaw in May to attend a conference marking the 25th anniversary of the end of communism and the 10th anniversary of Polish EU membership. The timing was also interesting because the crisis in Ukraine was heating up, making the Poles increasingly nervous about Russian moves in Central Europe.

I found that Poland was a country confident about its economic strength but worried about its future. History has given the Poles a deep understanding of geopolitics and too many reasons to be worried about the events beyond their borders. I visited Warsaw a few days before the arrival of U.S. President Barack Obama. The excitement caused by his visit was a confirmation of Poland's strategy of developing closer ties with the United States to help it cope with a politically fragmented European Union and a hesitant NATO. The Poles are proud of being members of the European Union, but they are not completely confident that Brussels will come to their rescue should the crisis with Russia escalate.

One Europe, Too Many Europes

Strasbourg is an excellent place to reflect on Europe because it is a synthesis of everything that is great and tragic about the Continent. The city looks German but feels French -- because it's both. Crossing the Rhine from Baden-Baden to Strasbourg and seeing that there are no border controls, and nothing to indicate that you've moved from Germany to France but a small sign that reads "French republic," is normal for anyone who was born in the past 30 years. But from a French king's order to his men to "burn the Palatinate" in the late 1680s to a German leader's invasion of France in the early 1940s, having peace between the countries east and west of the Rhine is an anomaly rather than the norm.

Six decades after the creation of the European Union, this is still the key relationship to watch. The crisis has now reached a point where its two main players are under extreme pressure. Germany joined the eurozone under the assumption that no bailouts would be given to nations in distress and no monetization of debt would take place. France joined the eurozone under the assumption that it would remain the political leader of Europe. The crisis has put all the promises and agreements that supported the Franco-German unity in doubt.

Europeanists believe that things would be much better if the European Union became a true federation. They are probably right. The question is how to accomplish this. As Germany learned during its unification in the 1870s and confirmed during its reunification in the 1990s, building a large united political unity out of smaller entities requires the redistribution of money and power. But what should come first, money or reforms? The European Union is currently seeing the worst of both worlds: A monetary union without a fiscal union. In other words, it has sovereign states that don't control their currencies and supranational institutions that don't control fiscal policy.

We tend to think of Europe as a cohesive unit because there is an entity called the European Union that has headquarters in Brussels and is represented across the Continent. To a certain extent, this perception is correct. But if anything, the crisis serves as a reminder of Europe's perennial state of fragmentation, which is the consequence of history and geography. These divisions led to the current crisis and will hamper any attempts to solve it.

Editor's Note: Writing in George Friedman's stead this week is Europe Analyst Adriano Bosoni.

Read more: Traveling Through Multiple Europes | Stratfor
Follow us: @stratfor on Twitter | Stratfor on Facebook

November 05, 2014

Why the existence of Pakistan is not in India’s interest

By Dr Amarjit SinghIssue Net Edition | Date : 30 Oct , 2014

Pakistan has been a thorn in India's left side for 65 years, and amazingly, India has tolerated its pain and irritation, against most odds of human nature.  After four wars and multiple proxy wars waged by Pakistan, it still doesn't count as much for India – a big elephant that is difficult to move.  India's Pakistan policy practices restraint and constraint against an enemy that hates it, that was born in conflict against India in brutal bloodshed, and even now hopes one day to overcome a weak India.

Pakistan still has the energy and gumption to promote proxy wars in India via Nepal, Bangladesh, and, of course, Kashmir.

Despite all the difficulties that Pakistan has faced and faces – internal political turmoil and terrorist threats, external issues in Afghanistan, an economy that is on the verge of collapse, and being condemned around the world for its export of terrorism – Pakistan still has the energy and gumption to promote proxy wars in India via Nepal, Bangladesh, and, of course, Kashmir.   Which concept of rationality in the modern world can accept Pakistan's belligerent and incongruent worldview, at a time when the civilized world wishes peace and economic prosperity against a threatening climate, growing population, an oncoming oil crisis, and worldwide economic woes?
By all facts and accounts, Pakistan has been sapping India's productive and psychic energy every day for 65 years.  It is somewhat true that Pakistan has been bleeding India by a thousand cuts.  Look at the billions of hours of productive time and newspaper print and headlines wasted on a Pakistan that is an affliction for India and perhaps the world.   None of the energy spent on Pakistan counts towards India's GDP or improved industrial productivity, nor does it improve the economic position of India.  The industrial production of India, creativeness of its engineers and thinkers, and ability to gain a foothold in the world has been compromised because a Pakistan exists that threatens war on the subcontinent, distracts national pursuits for excellence, and thereby diminishes foreign investment and confidence in India.  For India to grow and have peace and confidence, it must get rid of the Pakistan that obstructs it in many ways, even standing against it in its quest for a rightful position on the permanent Security Council, and one that tried vehemently to oppose the Indo-US nuclear deal.

Pakistan is more dangerous as an independent state positioned to be taken over by terrorist elements supported by a manipulative ISI than under Indian control.  In fact, the USA must find merit in the argument that it can better contain the terrorists and Taliban with India controlling them than they themselves.   While the USA realizes that Pakistan is duplicitous with its terrorists, the USA is unable to see through the haze that can only be seen by those who have lived with Pakistan and in Pakistan's neighborhood forever, such as India.  Neither does Afghanistan's Hamid Karzai trust Pakistan, nor do the Iranian Shia's have much love for Pakistan's Sunnis, even though the Iranians acquired nuclear technology from A Q Khan.  A Pakistan that doesn't exist is safer for the world than a Pakistan that does.
 Pakistan is more dangerous as an independent state positioned to be taken over by terrorist elements supported by a manipulative ISI than under Indian control.
Once every few years, Pakistan feigns interest for diplomacy and negotiations (cricket diplomacy, bus diplomacy, this or that) and often brings up ethnic and language similarity with India to suit its temporary interests – only to back off at the last minute and plot new proxy wars or battles against India.  This is of no use to India; in fact, it is a hindrance in India's quest to be a self-confident power in and of itself.   Pakistan presumably hates India and starts an anxiety disorder each time it realizes that Kashmir may slip from it is grip.  Now, in another deceptive move, Pakistan recommends that India withdraw from Siachen – a mistake India can ill afford to make after the mistakes of Haji Pir and the return of 93,000 POW's.   Withdraw from Siachen for what?  Only for Pakistan and China to occupy it in a sudden move before the onset of a future China-Pakistan joint invasion of Ladakh?  None of the satellite monitoring or UN observation systems will be effective at that time, and China and Pakistan will be staring down at Leh and the valley of Ladakh in free sport.  The sooner that India can realize it cannot ever trust Pakistan on anything, the healthier it is for India.  In that vein, the dialogue and negotiation with Pakistan that is thrust on India by the USA, only helps to prolong the inevitable and the burning pain.  The only way to put Pakistan in its place is to possibly have no truck with it, perhaps even not trade with it.  One reason that India often enters into negotiations with Pakistan is because its diplomats need to generate work for themselves to justify their existence; also, the USA quite often exerts pressure on India in its usual patronizing attitude to negotiate with Pakistan.  This is not healthy.

Among the most feared aspects of a war with Pakistan is the nuclear element.  Now that India has allowed Pakistan to move ahead in this department in the 1970s and 1980s, and failed to implement Operation Brasstacks into a fully fledged invasion of Pakistan, India has to bite the bullet on this score.  Though Pakistan threatens India with nuclear retaliation in an all-out war, that too must not hold India back against trashing Pakistan.  Whatever others may believe, my opinion is simply that it is better for India to brave a costly nuclear attack by Pakistan, and get it over with even at the cost of tens of millions of deaths, than suffer ignominy and pain day in and day out through a thousand cuts and wasted energy in unrealized potential.  This is not to say that the objective can't be achieved without a nuclear war.  In this respect, India's no-first strike policy stands it in very good stead.  In fact the process objective must be to achieve the strategic objective through conventional war.  Without the elimination of Pakistan, India may never become a secure nation where the mind is held high without fear, and cannot ever hope to attract the type of foreign investment it needs for its economic growth.  In addition, the psychological boost that India will get by eliminating Pakistan is unequal in and of itself—one which can propel India into the status of a future, stable, democratic, competitive, responsible, and secular nation.

Neither does Afghanistan's Hamid Karzai trust Pakistan, nor do the Iranian Shia's have much love for Pakistan's Sunnis, even though the Iranians acquired nuclear technology from A Q Khan.  A Pakistan that doesn't exist is safer for the world than a Pakistan that does.

Analysts tend to ask what will happen to a Pakistan if India defeats it in battle.  The answer is not complicated at all: Baluchistan will become independent, but under Indian security arrangements; Kashmir will revert to India; Sindh and West Punjab will be de-weaponized and become special states under Indian protection; and the entire NWFP handed over to the Pathans for a Pakhtoonistan that includes Southern Afghanistan and Kandahar.  This will have ramifications on Afghanistan, as well, which may then naturally divide into two for its own peace and stability; Afghanistan's northern areas consisting of the Uzbeks, Tajiks, and Hazaras, need to form their own country because they have little in emotional and filial bond with the Pathans.  This whole reorganization will change the boundaries of the region, but one that has to be undertaken which will be a welcome change to the current bloodshed, turmoil, and export of terrorism.  Very often, major change is needed to change the status quo when minor changes don't succeed.

Much of this is against formal Indian foreign and security policy.  The United Nations might also tend to balk at the destruction of a nation member, though it is likely that the West may not shed tears at this.  But, this article is not being written to agree with Indian policies, or to present a framework within those policies, or to appease those who worship the Indian mentality.  Quite to the contrary, a reformation in Indian policies is presented, and perhaps indicated, one that can give confidence and bring esteem to its people.  It is in this light that a new paradigm is advanced.  For instance, for long, the Indian policy has been to not engage in cross-border attacks, especially since Prime Minister Inder Gujral passed an ordinance to that effect in the late 1990s.  But, such instructions are counter-productive, and Pakistan has taken full advantage of that policy by increasing its own cross-border infiltration.  It is to be pointed out that Indian security policies are nothing to be proud of simply for the sake of pride in government.   Policies that trample on sustainable Indian pride must be dismantled.  The writer feels that the implementation of this new paradigm is ripe for action at this current time where Pakistan is reeling under internal imbalances.  If a boxer will not knock out his opponent when the opponent is dizzy and imbalanced, then other opportunities are only guesswork.

Eventually, for India to succeed, Pakistan must be out of the picture and cease to exist for peace on earth, and India must actively work towards that objective rather than waiting passively in spectator stands.

Subsequently, India must realize that it has deep religious and philosophical opposition in countries beyond Pakistan to the West.  Saudi Arabia finances and supports Pakistan in every way possible and depends on Pakistan for its nuclear shield; the Arab nations have deep links to Pakistan.  Discussion on what India needs to do in countries west of Pakistan is best left to another article.  However, it can be well understood that India needs to fully secure its western flank and neutralize all threats from the west in order to concentrate better on China and Tibet, and thus strengthen its hand on the eastern flank.  Thus, India needs to confront the uncertain future boldly, be a force in the region, spread the message of humanitarian rights and equal opportunity, project itself in the interests of peace and equanimity in the region, and avail of opportunities long before it is itself divided and dismembered.

Thus, the ideal planning option for India is to invest heavily on liberating Pakistan, invest massively in engineering enterprise and education that can advance indigenous armament production, and double or triple its ship building programs and shipyards in which it has exceptional expertise and capability; and it must plan this in ten years, for the plan to be effective to carry a punch.  These actions will ipso facto stimulate Indian industry, GDP growth, and bring employment and happiness to its people.  Very few educated people understand that money printed but used for stimulating indigenous manufacturing industries actually stimulates the economy, while inflation is checked by means such as control of interest rates and free trade with South East Asian nations.   For India to throw its money into foreign nations for expensive defense procurement does not sound like wisdom in action, though one cannot deny that importing defense equipment may be necessary on occasion.  India actually begs for enlightened leadership that has moral fiber and a spine to go with it.  It is time for the politicians to stop squabbling, for the generals to relearn service in the name of the nation rather than being involved in corruption scandals, and for the nation to get its priorities right and initiate industrial, agricultural, and trade reform.  Eventually, for India to succeed, Pakistan must be out of the picture and cease to exist for peace on earth, and India must actively work towards that objective rather than waiting passively in spectator stands.

November 04, 2014


Ashok Behuria 
01 November 2014

Modi's Cabinet has taken a welcome decision to reset India's Chabahar policy and put a stop to the lethargic approach exhibited by the country during the last one decade. However, it needs to take better stock of the ground realities and sustain its interest to harvest huge strategic gains in future

At long last, on October 18 the BJP-led NDA Government decided to invest in the strategically important Iranian port of Chabahar. As per the Cabinet's decision, India will invest $85.21 million in developing the port for use by India. Apart from this, the Cabinet decided to invest an annual revenue expenditure of $22.95 million to support the efforts.

The joint venture

Media reports further revealed that during the first phase of the project, an Indian joint venture (JV) company — consisting of Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust (JNPT) and Kandla Port Trust (KPT) — may partner with one or more Iranian concerns, with approval from the Iranian Ports and Maritime Organisation (P&MO), to execute the project on build-operate-transfer (BOT) basis.

The JV will develop and operate the port for 10 years and transfer the port to P&MO at the end of the 10th year. The JV will build, equip two berths within a year — one of them as a container terminal and the other as a multi-purpose cargo terminal. Based on the performance of the JV during the first phase, depending on the satisfaction of both the countries, further negotiations can be conducted for continuation of the arrangement again on BOT basis. 

India: Serious but shy?

The decision to develop Chabahar as a strategic, if not commercial port, was hanging fire for quite some time. Ever since former Iranian President Khatami offered India to build and operate Chabahar during his visit to India in 2003, foreign policy mandarins in India wasted valuable time weighing the pros and cons of the project. The imposition of extensive US sanctions on Iran in 2006, and improvement in India-US relations put paid to hopes of Indian investments in the port, even if it made tremendous strategic sense for India to invest in Chabahar.

Every time India faced resistance from Islamabad to send essential items to Afghanistan through Karachi port, Chabahar would find mention in strategic discourse in India as a project worth investing in. But it is primarily Indian sensitivity to US concerns about Iran which came in the way of developing Chabahar and alternate transit route through it to Afghanistan.

Even though India could not make much progress on the Chabahar front, as part of its overall plan to bypass Pakistan and access Afghanistan and central Asia through Iran, India built the 218 kilometre-long Zaranj (on Iran-Afghanistan border)-Delaram highway in Nimruz province of Afghanistan in 2009 to connect to the 2,200 kilometre two-lane metalled road network circulating inside Afghanistan, connecting major cities in the country. India spent about Rs 600 crore to build this connecting highway. The project was executed over four years (2005-2009) by Border Roads Organisation (BRO), which lost two of its employees along with four Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) personnel and 100-odd Afghan workers to insurgent attacks.

Iran's Chabahar efforts bearing fruit

Cynics noted that the Zaranj-Delaram highway was left to the mercy of Taliban following Indian indecision about developing Chabahar port and the land route — from Chabahar through Iranshahr to Zahedan and further north to Zabol and then to Milak close to Zaranj in Afghanistan. The whole route was about 890 kilometre-long and according to estimates by RITES, an Indian Government enterprise, the initial plan to build a railway from Chabahar to Zaranj would have cost about $1bn, which was unaffordable. By 2011, the Iranians had shelved the plan for connecting Zaranj by rail and built a four-lane highway linking Chabahar with Milak.

Chabahar petrochemical zone

By 2014, Iran decided to invest heavily in Chabahar all on its own. Its main aim has been to prepare Chabahar as the third major hub for petrochemical industries in Iran (the first two are in Bandar Imam and Assaluyeh).

The Iranian Government has earmarked a large area spread over about 1,100 hectares as petrochemical complex. This area is being developed to attract both domestic and external investment. In a dusty corner of the city, about 20-25 km away from the Chabahar airport, with investment by SATA (Armed Forces' Social Welfare Investment Organisation), an Iranian company called Mokran Negin Development Co. has laid down roads, drawn up electricity lines and is in the process of building water connections. During the first phase, about 1,100 hectares of land has been developed, and about 3,000 hectares would be made ready by the end of the third phase.

The Iranian Government also has plans to link Chabahar with Zahedan and Mashhad by rail. A new pipeline is also being considered for transferring South Pars ethane gas to Chabahar. A railway station is being built to connect the industrial zone with the port.

As per Iranian estimates, there will be about 16 basic petrochemical complexes built in three different phases consisting of plants which will produce urea, ammonia, methanol, polypropylene, olefin and dimethoxyethane. The complex will also have an aromatic complex and a crystal melamine plant. Iranians are looking at a cumulative investment of about $80 billion by the end of the project.

Craze for Chabahar! China leading the pack

Iranians are quite optimistic about the nuclear talks and expect that this will lead to easing of sanctions, following which more and more companies from around the world would invest there.

In fact, Iranian efforts have not gone unrecognised. This petrochemical investment zone has drawn the attention of many foreign companies from China, Oman and some of the European countries. About eight Iranian companies have already invested in the zone.

China has already invested in Chabahar in the heavy oil refinery sector. A new Chinese refinery is coming up just opposite the upcoming petrochemical zone. During a recent visit, one could see squat barracks coming up on the refinery site. China has also started taking interest in the port itself. A Chinese dredger, probably leased to the Iranians and flying the Iranian flag, was seen anchored in the Saeed Beheshti terminal of the Chabahar port.

There is a beeline of Chinese businessmen for investing in Iran, in general and in the port city, in particular. Some of the Chinese businessmen have already set up a special market complex to sell Chinese items.

In the hotels of Tehran, which have suddenly sprung up into action, one could see dozens of Chinese entrepreneurs camping for weeks exploring ways of investing in Iran in anticipation of withdrawal or at least relaxation of sanctions by the US and international community.

Gratified as the Iranians look, upon being courted by the Chinese investors, one could sense a sense of unease about long-term association with China among Iranian interlocutors one came across. In the educational institutes in Tehran, there was neither much interest in China nor enthusiasm about prospects of Chinese investments, even though one could sense a quiet appreciation of "Chinese courage" to court Iran, despite the American sanctions.

Better late than never

For Iranians, Indian interest in Chabahar is reactive rather than proactive. Many Iranian analysts look at Indian decision to invest in Chabahar as a last ditch effort to compensate for years of negligence. Indian investment of $85 million is also being touted as being too little too late by some.

Nevertheless, as one would gather, most Iranians have high expectations from the newly-elected Modi Government. Prime Minister Modi's image of being a doer has also led them to believe that this time round, India will not vacillate on its decision and stay put on the track.

Interaction with officials of the Chabahar Free Zone revealed that Iranians are interested in developing a "logistics zone" jointly with India with the purpose of providing services for transit and trade. Early activation of shipping lines between Chabahar and Indian ports like Kandla and Mumbai is also being urged by Iranians for quite some time.

Future prospects

We must realise that Chabahar is ideal for both oil and non-oil trade. Moreover, there are various investment incentives now in Chabahar like availability of cheap energy and transportation infrastructure. India could consider investing in areas like automobiles, pharmaceuticals, textiles and food processing (tea, rice, spices, etc.). Local traders would also talk about craze for Indian imitation jewellery and the need for India to invest in education, particularly in IT and Business Management. Private educational institutes can be encouraged to open their branches in Chabahar.

Last but not the least, there is a fear among many Indian analysts that being an area dominated by Sunni Baloch population, Iran may not be sincere about its intent to develop Chabahar. Baloch insurgents of Iran have in the past taken on the Iranian forces in the province. However, unlike the case of China in Pakistani province of Balochistan, there is a tremendous reservoir of goodwill vis-à-vis India in the Iranian province of Sistan-Baluchistan. Moreover, Iranian intent to develop Chabahar in spite of their concerns about Baloch insurgency is quite visible in the massive investments they have made in the port and in creating supportive infrastructure around it. It is time for India to shed its inhibitions and go the whole hog.

Connectivity is a key issue for the Indian Government today. With Chabahar providing India access to Afghanistan and Central Asia bypassing Pakistan, investment in Chabahar is likely to yield immediate strategic gains, while commercial considerations are most likely to follow in a not-too-distant future, provided we have the will to seize the opportunity well.

(The writer is Coordinator, South Asia Centre, IDSA)