Sep 20, 2012

Confrontation, Dialogue and Radicalization

published in The Book Review, Vol XXXVI, No. 9, South Asia XX-1, September 2012, 18-19
 
Irfan Husain, Fatal Faultlines: Pakistan, Islam and the West
Fatal Faultlines is a lucid account delving into many difficult questions which lie at the heart of interactions between Islam, the West and Pakistan. These range from historical confrontation between Muslim and western civilizations and their impact on the current ‘dialogue’ between Muslim countries and the West. Husain studies the roots of terrorism and increasing radicalization. In less than 250 pages, Irfan Husain—a popular Pakistani journalist—has delved into these and many related issues which make our world an increasingly dangerous place in a simple, well researched and easy to read book.

‘Why us?’ is an interesting, yet telling question, which is posed to the author by his American friends in the aftermath of 9/11 attacks. It is an important question, which the United States as a country should ask itself in order to extricate itself out of the chakravyuha it finds itself in. Despite American humanitarian efforts in many counties from Bosnia to Pakistan, anti-Americanism is on the rise across the globe. The book, in many ways, is an attempt to answer this central question.

One of the most important sources of this hatred is the result of American support—influenced by geopolitics and economics—of authoritarian regimes in many Muslim countries. During the Cold War this meant keeping pro-Soviet Left wing groups away from power even if it meant extending support to despots. These authoritarian regimes in turn used this support to crush domestic opposition, which were more often than not, led by Islamic groups like the Muslim Brotherhood.
Another reason for the widespread disenchantment with the US has been its constant support of Israel Muslims. Why the US despite all its talk of democracy, justice and human rights, can turn a blind eye to the violation of these ideals in Palestine on a daily basis cannot be fathomed. As Husain points out, ‘the fact that the United States is Israel’s biggest patron and strongest ally results in much of this anger being directed towards Washington’ (p. 9).

Share:

Sep 12, 2012

Syrian Chemical Weapons: The Danger Within

published by Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi as Issue Brief #45, September 2012, available at http://www.observerindia.com/cms/sites/orfonline/modules/issuebrief/attachments/ORF_Issue_brief_45_1347355536755.pdf

Syrian CW Facilities (World Tribune website)
The Syrian case is a unique one. A country with a WMD-armed capability has never witnessed civil strife before. The active involvement of terror groups like Hezbollah, Hamas and al-Qaeda in Iraq coupled with the weakening hold of the Assad regime over large swathes of the country makes the situation grim. This raises the very real spectre of Syrian chemical weapons and missiles falling into the hands of these terror groups.

Given the ongoing civil war in the country, Syria's neighbours and the West have been concerned about the safety and security of the chemical and biological weapons in Syria.1 In a bid to possibly allay these fears, the Syrian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Dr. Jihad Makdissi made a statement at a televised news conference on July 23, 2012. In the statement, Makdissi said,

“Any chemical or bacterial weapon will never be used––and I repeat will never be used––during the crisis in Syria regardless of the developments. All of these types of weapons are in storage and under security and the direct supervision of the Syrian armed forces and will never be used unless Syria is exposed to external aggression”.
The statement is crucial for several reasons. Most importantly, Makdissi's statement is the first public
admission by the Assad regime of possessing stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons. While the statement reiterates the Syrian regime's long-standing policy of not using chemical weapons against its own population, it also lays down an important “red line.” Possibly, learning from the treatment meted out to Tripoli after it gave up its chemical weapons, Syria has made it clear that it will not use these weapons “unless Syria is exposed to external aggression .

Makdissi's statement can also be seen as an attempt on the part of the Assad regime to reassure the international community that the chemical weapon stockpile continues to remain under its firm control.

In this context, a recent statement by Amos Gilad, head of the Israeli Defence Ministry's political defence department that Syria does remain in full control of its facilities assumes significance. Interestingly, media reports quoting American intelligence officials indicate that the al-Assad regime has in fact been consolidating its CW stockpile. The regime has been moving its chemical and biological arsenal away from northern parts of Syria which have seen more hostilities. While the consolidation could be seen as attempts at securing the CBW stockpile by removing them from harm's way, it could also be seen as a means of lending greater credibility to Syrian assertion of its “red lines” and deter any foreign military intervention.

Share: