As the Arabs see the Jews

This is quite an interesting essay on the Palestine-Israel situation. I am pasting it as it is from this link so that you can read it in its entirety here.

Introduction:

This fascinating essay, written by King Hussein’s grandfather King Abdullah, appeared in the United States six months before the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. In the article, King Abdullah disputes the mistaken view that Arab opposition to Zionism (and later the state of Israel) is because of longstanding religious or ethnic hatred. He notes that Jews and Muslims enjoyed a long history of peaceful coexistence in the Middle East, and that Jews have historically suffered far more at the hands of Christian Europe. Pointing to the tragedy of the holocaust that Jews suffered during World War II, the monarch asks why America and Europe are refusing to accept more than a token handful of Jewish immigrants and refugees. It is unfair, he argues, to make Palestine, which is innocent of anti-Semitism, pay for the crimes of Europe. King Abdullah also asks how Jews can claim a historic right to Palestine, when Arabs have been the overwhelming majority there for nearly 1300 uninterrupted years? The essay ends on an ominous note, warning of dire consequences if a peaceful solution cannot be found to protect the rights of the indigenous Arabs of Palestine.

The essay follows:

I am especially delighted to address an American audience, for the tragic problem of Palestine will never be solved without American understanding, American sympathy, American support.

So many billions of words have been written about Palestine—perhaps more than on any other subject in history—that I hesitate to add to them. Yet I am compelled to do so, for I am reluctantly convinced that the world in general, and America in particular, knows almost nothing of the true case for the Arabs.

We Arabs follow, perhaps far more than you think, the press of America. We are frankly disturbed to find that for every word printed on the Arab side, a thousand are printed on the Zionist side.

There are many reasons for this. You have many millions of Jewish citizens interested in this question. They are highly vocal and wise in the ways of publicity. There are few Arab citizens in America, and we are as yet unskilled in the technique of modern propaganda.

The results have been alarming for us. In your press we see a horrible caricature and are told it is our true portrait. In all justice, we cannot let this pass by default.

Our case is quite simple: For nearly 2,000 years Palestine has been almost 100 per cent Arab. It is still preponderantly Arab today, in spite of enormous Jewish immigration. But if this immigration continues we shall soon be outnumbered—a minority in our home.

Palestine is a small and very poor country, about the size of your state of Vermont. Its Arab population is only about 1,200,000. Already we have had forced on us, against our will, some 600,000 Zionist Jews. We are threatened with many hundreds of thousands more.

Our position is so simple and natural that we are amazed it should even be questioned. It is exactly the same position you in America take in regard to the unhappy European Jews. You are sorry for them, but you do not want them in your country.

We do not want them in ours, either. Not because they are Jews, but because they are foreigners. We would not want hundreds of thousands of foreigners in our country, be they Englishmen or Norwegians or Brazilians or whatever.

Think for a moment: In the last 25 years we have had one third of our entire population forced upon us. In America that would be the equivalent of 45,000,000 complete strangers admitted to your country, over your violent protest, since 1921. How would you have reacted to that?

Because of our perfectly natural dislike of being overwhelmed in our own homeland, we are called blind nationalists and heartless anti-Semites. This charge would be ludicrous were it not so dangerous.

No people on earth have been less "anti-Semitic" than the Arabs. The persecution of the Jews has been confined almost entirely to the Christian nations of the West. Jews, themselves, will admit that never since the Great Dispersion did Jews develop so freely and reach such importance as in Spain when it was an Arab possession. With very minor exceptions, Jews have lived for many centuries in the Middle East, in complete peace and friendliness with their Arab neighbours.

Damascus, Baghdad, Beirut and other Arab centres have always contained large and prosperous Jewish colonies. Until the Zionist invasion of Palestine began, these Jews received the most generous treatment—far, far better than in Christian Europe. Now, unhappily, for the first time in history, these Jews are beginning to feel the effects of Arab resistance to the Zionist assault. Most of them are as anxious as Arabs to stop it. Most of these Jews who have found happy homes among us resent, as we do, the coming of these strangers.

I was puzzled for a long time about the odd belief which apparently persists in America that Palestine has somehow "always been a Jewish land." Recently an American I talked to cleared up this mystery. He pointed out that the only things most Americans know about Palestine are what they read in the Bible. It was a Jewish land in those days, they reason, and they assume it has always remained so.

Nothing could be farther from the truth. It is absurd to reach so far back into the mists of history to argue about who should have Palestine today, and I apologise for it. Yet the Jews do this, and I must reply to their "historic claim." I wonder if the world has ever seen a stranger sight than a group of people seriously pretending to claim a land because their ancestors lived there some 2,000 years ago!

If you suggest that I am biased, I invite you to read any sound history of the period and verify the facts.

Such fragmentary records as we have indicate that the Jews were wandering nomads from Iraq who moved to southern Turkey, came south to Palestine, stayed there a short time, and then passed to Egypt, where they remained about 400 years. About 1300 BC (according to your calendar) they left Egypt and gradually conquered most—but not all—of the inhabitants of Palestine.

It is significant that the Philistines—not the Jews—gave their name to the country: "Palestine" is merely the Greek form of "Philistia."

Only once, during the empire of David and Solomon, did the Jews ever control nearly—but not all—the land which is today Palestine. This empire lasted only 70 years, ending in 926 BC. Only 250 years later the Kingdom of Judah had shrunk to a small province around Jerusalem, barely a quarter of modern Palestine.

In 63 BC the Jews were conquered by Roman Pompey, and never again had even the vestige of independence. The Roman Emperor Hadrian finally wiped them out about 135 AD. He utterly destroyed Jerusalem, rebuilt under another name, and for hundreds of years no Jew was permitted to enter it. A handful of Jews remained in Palestine but the vast majority were killed or scattered to other countries, in the Diaspora, or the Great Dispersion. From that time Palestine ceased to be a Jewish country, in any conceivable sense.

This was 1,815 years ago, and yet the Jews solemnly pretend they still own Palestine! If such fantasy were allowed, how the map of the world would dance about!

Italians might claim England, which the Romans held so long. England might claim France, "homeland" of the conquering Normans. And the French Normans might claim Norway, where their ancestors originated. And incidentally, we Arabs might claim Spain, which we held for 700 years.

Many Mexicans might claim Spain, "homeland" of their forefathers. They might even claim Texas, which was Mexican until 100 years ago. And suppose the American Indians claimed the "homeland" of which they were the sole, native, and ancient occupants until only some 450 years ago!

I am not being facetious. All these claims are just as valid—or just as fantastic—as the Jewish "historic connection" with Palestine. Most are more valid.

In any event, the great Moslem expansion about 650 AD finally settled things. It dominated Palestine completely. From that day on, Palestine was solidly Arabic in population, language, and religion. When British armies entered the country during the last war, they found 500,000 Arabs and only 65,000 Jews.

If solid, uninterrupted Arab occupation for nearly 1,300 years does not make a country "Arab", what does?

The Jews say, and rightly, that Palestine is the home of their religion. It is likewise the birthplace of Christianity, but would any Christian nation claim it on that account? In passing, let me say that the Christian Arabs—and there are many hundreds of thousands of them in the Arab World—are in absolute agreement with all other Arabs in opposing the Zionist invasion of Palestine.

May I also point out that Jerusalem is, after Mecca and Medina, the holiest place in Islam. In fact, in the early days of our religion, Moslems prayed toward Jerusalem instead of Mecca.

The Jewish "religious claim" to Palestine is as absurd as the "historic claim." The Holy Places, sacred to three great religions, must be open to all, the monopoly of none. Let us not confuse religion and politics.

We are told that we are inhumane and heartless because do not accept with open arms the perhaps 200,000 Jews in Europe who suffered so frightfully under Nazi cruelty, and who even now—almost three years after war’s end—still languish in cold, depressing camps.

Let me underline several facts. The unimaginable persecution of the Jews was not done by the Arabs: it was done by a Christian nation in the West. The war which ruined Europe and made it almost impossible for these Jews to rehabilitate themselves was fought by the Christian nations of the West. The rich and empty portions of the earth belong, not to the Arabs, but to the Christian nations of the West.

And yet, to ease their consciences, these Christian nations of the West are asking Palestine—a poor and tiny Moslem country of the East—to accept the entire burden. "We have hurt these people terribly," cries the West to the East. "Won’t you please take care of them for us?"

We find neither logic nor justice in this. Are we therefore "cruel and heartless nationalists"?

We are a generous people: we are proud that "Arab hospitality" is a phrase famous throughout the world. We are a humane people: no one was shocked more than we by the Hitlerite terror. No one pities the present plight of the desperate European Jews more than we.

But we say that Palestine has already sheltered 600,000 refugees. We believe that is enough to expect of us—even too much. We believe it is now the turn of the rest of the world to accept some of them.

I will be entirely frank with you. There is one thing the Arab world simply cannot understand. Of all the nations of the earth, America is most insistent that something be done for these suffering Jews of Europe. This feeling does credit to the humanity for which America is famous, and to that glorious inscription on your Statue of Liberty.

And yet this same America—the richest, greatest, most powerful nation the world has ever known—refuses to accept more than a token handful of these same Jews herself!

I hope you will not think I am being bitter about this. I have tried hard to understand that mysterious paradox, and I confess I cannot. Nor can any other Arab.

Perhaps you have been informed that "the Jews in Europe want to go to no other place except Palestine."

This myth is one of the greatest propaganda triumphs of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, the organisation which promotes with fanatic zeal the emigration to Palestine. It is a subtle half-truth, thus doubly dangerous.

The astounding truth is that nobody on earth really knows where these unfortunate Jews really want to go!

You would think that in so grave a problem, the American, British, and other authorities responsible for the European Jews would have made a very careful survey, probably by vote, to find out where each Jew actually wants to go. Amazingly enough this has never been done! The Jewish Agency has prevented it.

Some time ago the American Military Governor in Germany was asked at a press conference how he was so certain that all Jews there wanted to go to Palestine. His answer was simple: "My Jewish advisors tell me so." He admitted no poll had ever been made. Preparations were indeed begun for one, but the Jewish Agency stepped in to stop it.

The truth is that the Jews in German camps are now subjected to a Zionist pressure campaign which learned much from the Nazi terror. It is dangerous for a Jew to say that he would rather go to some other country, not Palestine. Such dissenters have been severely beaten, and worse.

Not long ago, in Palestine, nearly 1,000 Austrian Jews informed the international refugee organisation that they would like to go back to Austria, and plans were made to repatriate them.

The Jewish Agency heard of this, and exerted enough political pressure to stop it. It would be bad propaganda for Zionism if Jews began leaving Palestine. The nearly 1,000 Austrian are still there, against their will.

The fact is that most of the European Jews are Western in culture and outlook, entirely urban in experience and habits. They cannot really have their hearts set on becoming pioneers in the barren, arid, cramped land which is Palestine.

One thing, however, is undoubtedly true. As matters stand now, most refugee Jews in Europe would, indeed, vote for Palestine, simply because they know no other country will have them.

If you or I were given a choice between a near-prison camp for the rest of our lives—or Palestine—we would both choose Palestine, too.

But open up any other alternative to them—give them any other choice, and see what happens!

No poll, however, will be worth anything unless the nations of the earth are willing to open their doors—just a little—to the Jews. In other words, if in such a poll a Jew says he wants to go to Sweden, Sweden must be willing to accept him. If he votes for America, you must let him come in.

Any other kind of poll would be a farce. For the desperate Jew, this is no idle testing of opinion: this is a grave matter of life or death. Unless he is absolutely sure that his vote means something, he will always vote for Palestine, so as not to risk his bird in the hand for one in the bush.

In any event, Palestine can accept no more. The 65,000 Jews in Palestine in 1918 have jumped to 600,000 today. We Arabs have increased, too, but not by immigration. The Jews were then a mere 11 per cent of our population. Today they are one third of it.

The rate of increase has been terrifying. In a few more years—unless stopped now—it will overwhelm us, and we shall be an important minority in our own home.

Surely the rest of the wide world is rich enough and generous enough to find a place for 200,000 Jews—about one third the number that tiny, poor Palestine has already sheltered. For the rest of the world, it is hardly a drop in the bucket. For us it means national suicide.

We are sometimes told that since the Jews came to Palestine, the Arab standard of living has improved. This is a most complicated question. But let us even assume, for the argument, that it is true. We would rather be a bit poorer, and masters of our own home. Is this unnatural?

The sorry story of the so-called "Balfour Declaration," which started Zionist immigration into Palestine, is too complicated to repeat here in detail. It is grounded in broken promises to the Arabs—promises made in cold print which admit no denying.

We utterly deny its validity. We utterly deny the right of Great Britain to give away Arab land for a "national home" for an entirely foreign people.

Even the League of Nations sanction does not alter this. At the time, not a single Arab state was a member of the League. We were not allowed to say a word in our own defense.

I must point out, again in friendly frankness, that America was nearly as responsible as Britain for this Balfour Declaration. President Wilson approved it before it was issued, and the American Congress adopted it word for word in a joint resolution on 30th June, 1922.

In the 1920s, Arabs were annoyed and insulted by Zionist immigration, but not alarmed by it. It was steady, but fairly small, as even the Zionist founders thought it would remain. Indeed for some years, more Jews left Palestine than entered it—in 1927 almost twice as many.

But two new factors, entirely unforeseen by Britain or the League or America or the most fervent Zionist, arose in the early thirties to raise the immigration to undreamed heights. One was the World Depression; the second the rise of Hitler.

In 1932, the year before Hitler came to power, only 9,500 Jews came to Palestine. We did not welcome them, but we were not afraid that, at that rate, our solid Arab majority would ever be in danger.

But the next year—the year of Hitler—it jumped to 30,000! In 1934 it was 42,000! In 1935 it reached 61,000!

It was no longer the orderly arrival of idealist Zionists. Rather, all Europe was pouring its frightened Jews upon us. Then, at last, we, too, became frightened. We knew that unless this enormous influx stopped, we were, as Arabs, doomed in our Palestine homeland. And we have not changed our minds.

I have the impression that many Americans believe the trouble in Palestine is very remote from them, that America had little to do with it, and that your only interest now is that of a humane bystander.

I believe that you do not realise how directly you are, as a nation, responsible in general for the whole Zionist move and specifically for the present terrorism. I call this to your attention because I am certain that if you realise your responsibility you will act fairly to admit it and assume it.

Quite aside from official American support for the "National Home" of the Balfour Declaration, the Zionist settlements in Palestine would have been almost impossible, on anything like the current scale, without American money. This was contributed by American Jewry in an idealistic effort to help their fellows.

The motive was worthy: the result were disastrous. The contributions were by private individuals, but they were almost entirely Americans, and, as a nation, only America can answer for it.

The present catastrophe may be laid almost entirely at your door. Your government, almost alone in the world, is insisting on the immediate admission of 100,000 more Jews into Palestine—to be followed by countless additional ones. This will have the most frightful consequences in bloody chaos beyond anything ever hinted at in Palestine before.

It is your press and political leadership, almost alone in the world, who press this demand. It is almost entirely American money which hires or buys the "refugee ships" that steam illegally toward Palestine: American money which pays their crews. The illegal immigration from Europe is arranged by the Jewish Agency, supported almost entirely by American funds. It is American dollars which support the terrorists, which buy the bullets and pistols that kill British soldiers—your allies—and Arab citizens—your friends.

We in the Arab world were stunned to hear that you permit open advertisements in newspapers asking for money to finance these terrorists, to arm them openly and deliberately for murder. We could not believe this could really happen in the modern world. Now we must believe it: we have seen the advertisements with our own eyes.

I point out these things because nothing less than complete frankness will be of use. The crisis is too stark for mere polite vagueness which means nothing.

I have the most complete confidence in the fair-mindedness and generosity of the American public. We Arabs ask no favours. We ask only that you know the full truth, not half of it. We ask only that when you judge the Palestine question, you put yourselves in our place.

What would your answer be if some outside agency told you that you must accept in America many millions of utter strangers in your midst—enough to dominate your country—merely because they insisted on going to America, and because their forefathers had once lived there some 2,000 years ago?

Our answer is the same.

And what would be your action if, in spite of your refusal, this outside agency began forcing them on you?

Ours will be the same.

The Mumbai attacks have widened the social gap, and blurred it

A news TV channel was recently asking its viewers to call and give their views on the recent terror attacks in Mumbai. Among a flurry of calls condemning the attacks and expressing sorrow and condolences for the dead a few people mentioned that all this hue and cry was being raised because this time the terrorists had targeted the rich and the influential. Although some poor people died in random shootings the biggest brunt of the attacks was borne by two highly expensive hotels. These hotels are frequented by the high and mighty of business, glamour and politics.

This article in New York Times talks about the same gap between the rich and the poor. It’s not the first time the country has witnessed violence; as the writer of this article rightly states that there were the Gujarat riots where thousands of Muslims were killed and then denied justice afterwards and then there were anti-Sikh riots in 1984 and here too the victims were denied justice. These rich and famous people kept quiet although there were always some scattered murmurs here and there.

Not only riots, there have been numerous terrorist attacks on railway stations, on trains, on local markets, all sorts of violent acts that defy human logic take place in urban as well as rural areas, people of the lower castes are treated like animals, literally, women and even small girls are mass-raped and not even a single leaf of protest stirs on the streets of the metropolitan cities, and this kind of apprising against the politicians and the administration has been conspicuously lacking.

Barkha Dutt rightly mentioned some time ago that the Mumbai-like situations keep on taking place in Jammu and Kashmir and it doesn’t move the rest of the country to protests and demonstrations. Why wasn’t there a mass moment for the persecution of Narendra Modi after the Gujarat riots? Why wasn’t the Chief Minister forced to step down after the Mumbai train blasts? This time, the Union Home Minister had to resign, and the State Home Minister and the Chief Minister of Maharashtra had to go, all because the rich and the famous were targeted this time by the terrorists.

All along if these people have been thinking that they are immune to the woes of the common man they have been living in a denial of gigantic proportions. It doesn’t matter if you’re rich or poor, sooner or later the general civic conditions catch-up with you, slap your face and wake you up. If the streets are unsafe for the poor they are also unsafe for the rich because everybody has to use those streets.

I wonder why people fail to understand that everything in our society is interrelated. Whether it is corruption, lawlessness, disrespect for the public property, hatred against various communities, castes and economic classes, the rural-urban divide and a general indifference towards fellow human beings, everything boils down to a condition where living a normal, safe life becomes almost impossible. You cannot demand safety without demanding social justice. You cannot protest against criminal politicians without voting. You cannot complain against corruption without resisting temptation to get things done the easier way by bribing. You cannot impart proper education to your children if all you are worried about is completing their syllabi. You cannot suppress social unrest unless everybody gets equal opportunities. You cannot remove hatred without spreading love.

Want to make your country safe for your children and their children? Do the following:

• Define a zero tolerance policy against lawlessness, corruption and other malpractices.
• Strictly keep religion a private affair and never ever let your religious leaders and politicians mix it with politics.
• Demand better civic services. Demand better roads. Demand better buildings. Demand uninterrupted power supply and clean water. Demand education for everybody. Demand for and health services for everybody. Don’t let the population of the country become an excuse.
• Act as a nation whenever possible. Don’t protest only when you are hurt. Fight for your neighbor, fight for your neighbor’s neighbor, and fight for that poor farmer living in that far away village.
• Give respect and demand respect.
• Fight for justice wherever you feel that justice is denied.
• If it is in your capability try to raise the standard of living of people living around you.
• Always be on the alert.
• Don’t dislike people because they are rich, poor, Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, upper castes and lower castes. After all we all have to live in the same country. It is very stupid to think that one segment of the society can be safe while the other bleeds.
• Educate people. Even if you are able to educate one person it can have a cascading effect.
• Feel proud of your country in the real sense not in jingoistic manner.

Of course, you can keep on adding various actions. Among these there are many things that cannot be achieved by a single person. It needs to be a collective effort simply because even the evil things in the society work collectively. If you are observant you will notice that corrupt politicians never stand against each other even if they belong to opposite parties. Bad people act bad with impunity because most of the time they are united. Good people need to unite too, for a change.

Our policemen have the most archaic guns

While reading this article I was wondering why the policeman mentioned in it didn’t fire at the terrorists who were firing indiscriminately with their modern, automatic weapons. Like the photographer in the article I was really feeling that; only if they had killed those two terrorists on time it would have saved many lives.

Then I saw footage on TV that showed how two policemen tried to fire at the terrorists but the gun got jammed and wouldn’t fire even a single shot. Both the policeman had to take cover and when they couldn’t fire they ran from there. It looked so pathetic with terrorists moving around proudly with their automatic assault rifles and machine guns and our policemen having a single gun that was nothing better than a stick. Most of the guns given to the policemen belong to the World War II era according to an article I read today in The Pioneer. As JB rightly mentioned in one of his comments that we should definitely find out where all the money goes that we pay to the government in the form of taxes.  I wonder if the right to information act can help here. Even the bullet-proof jackets worn by them are of highly poor quality and they cannot withstand the bullet of even the locally made handguns.  Incidentally the commandos who protect our VIPs and other ministers are well-equipped with latest gadgets and weaponry. Democracy in its true, shining colors.

Govt knew about the threat, did nothing: Arun Shourie

JB posted this link in the comment section of the previous post. Since very few bloggers will link to an Arun Shourie article, I thought I’ll put the link in a separate post, with main highlights.

Our coastal areas are coming under increased threat from terrorist groups, which have decided to use the sea route to infiltrate into India. They also plan to induct arms and ammunition through the sea routes” — that is Shivraj Patil addressing the directors general and inspectors general of police in November 2006. “We understand they (the terrorists) have been collecting information regarding location of various refineries on or near the Indian coastline… Some Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) operatives are also being trained specifically for sabotage of Oil installations. There are plans to occupy some uninhabited islands off the country’s coastline to use them as bases for launching operations on the Indian coast…”

That was the ever-alert home minister in November 2006. The minister of defence has been no less alert. On March 9 2007, he was asked in the Lok Sabha, whether “the intelligence agencies have warned about the possibility of terrorists trying to infiltrate through the sea route or trying to target our offshore installations?” He answered, “Yes, sir. There are reports about terrorists of various tanzeems being imparted training and likelihood of their infiltration through sea routes…” He was asked whether “maritime terrorism, gun-running, drug-trafficking and piracy are major threats that India is facing from the sea borders of the country?” His answer? “Yes, sir.”

On May 9 2007, the home minister was asked in the Rajya Sabha, whether “it is a fact that there are strong apprehensions of terrorist threats to the country through the sea route?” “As per available reports,” he answered, “Pak based terrorist groups, particularly LeT, have been exploring possibilities of induction of manpower and terrorist hardware through the sea route…” On December 8, 2007, the National Security Adviser, M.K. Narayanan, was educating the world at the 4th Regional Security Summit organised by the International Institute of Strategic Studies, the Manama Dialogue. “According to our intelligence reports,” he confided to the assembled sheikhs and experts, “there are now certain new schools that are now being established on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, which now specialise in the training of an international brigade of terrorists to fight in many climes. According to our information, recruits from 14 to 15 countries have been identified as amongst the trainees there… Training has become extremely rigorous — it is almost frightening in nature… Studies are being carried out about important targets, with regard to vulnerability, accessibility, poor security, absence of proper counter-terrorism measures, etc. The sea route, in particular, is becoming the chosen route for carrying out many attacks, even on land. References to this are to be found replete in current terrorist literature.” “Given India’s experience in dealing with terrorism,” he added, “I would like to therefore sound a note of warning, that there is no scope for complacency…”

On March 11, 2008, A.K. Antony addressed the “International Maritime Search and Rescue Conference,” in Delhi. He warned the delegates of “dangers of Terror attacks from the sea in the region.” In the course of his address, Antony admitted that the Coast Guard faces shortage of manpower as well as hardware. But “necessary steps are being taken to strengthen the search and rescue infrastructure of the Indian Coast Guard…” On November 13, 2008, just a fortnight before the assaults at Mumbai, Manmohan Singh warned the BIMSTEC summit, “Terrorism and threats from the sea continue to challenge the authority of the state…”

By now it was time for Shivraj Patil to address yet another meeting of the DGs and IGs of Police. Thus on November 22, 2008, that is literally on the eve of the attacks in Mumbai, he told the police chiefs, “To control terrorism in the hinterland, we have to see that infiltration of terrorists from other countries does not take place through the sea routes and through the borders between India and friendly countries. The coastlines also have to be guarded through Navy, Coast Guard and coastal police. The states’ special branches and the CID should identify the persons forming part of the sleeper cells and lodging in cities and towns and studying in educational institutions and working in industries and professions…”

And four days later, the terrorists, using the exact same sea route, do the exact same thing that these worthies have been warning others about. Are they consultants to Government or ones running the government? Is their job to issue warnings to others or to see that the warnings are acted upon? Warning given, the job is done. But that is the fate of warnings in this system. After all, that very sea route was used to smuggle explosives for the blasts across Bombay in 1993. Were those blasts not warning enough?

…

Things to do. First, act on recommendations that are made by committees you set up. Second, that will not happen unless we send a better type into legislatures and, thence, to governments. When we select leaders who treat the police as their private army; when we select leaders for whom investigating agencies are instruments to fix rivals or let off allies, don’t expect the police and agencies to suddenly turn around and forestall terrorists.

Third, remember that little can be achieved unless every aspect of governance, is brought up to par. You can’t have a first-rate commando force and a third rate magistracy. You can’t have defence and intelligence personnel who will nab terrorists and courts that will let them off, or, better still, enable them to live off the treasury as state guests for years. And that excellence must reach down to that “head constable/constable” level. When K.P.S. Gill reconquered Punjab for the country, he did so by strengthening and invigorating the local thana.

Fourth, that is only one part of the explanation. A weakened and confused society explains as much — and the responsibility lies as much with those who have dissipated national resolve, who have made nationalism a dirty word. That set includes the media as much as politicians. Sixty-seventy thousand killed by terrorism and we are still debating whether we should have a federal investigating agency. Sixty-seventy thousand killed by terrorists and we are still debating whether we should have a special law to bring them to book.

Of course, we must have the agency. Of course, we must have the sternest law in the world. But having the law is not enough. We must enforce it. One side of the picture is that, to pander to its vote bank among Muslims, the government has been withholding sanction to the law passed by the Gujarat assembly — even though that law is the exact replica of the law that its own party’s government has passed in adjacent Maharashtra. The other side is that, as the Maharashtra government does not use the law it has, those who will give shelter and support to terrorists give them with abandon — you just have to think of the quantum of weapons that the terrorists brought in; the detailed local knowledge they had — of the spot at which to land their boats, of the location of the building in which Jews and Israelis were staying, of the insides of the hotels, to see that they could not have executed their plans without the most extensive local help, help given over months.

And enforcing the law means carrying out sentences that the law provides. The parliament of India is attacked, guards are killed; one of the killers is tried and convicted, the sentence is confirmed by the Supreme Court, and, eight years after the assault, his “papers are still being processed,” indeed there are signature campaigns against executing the sentence. Given these circumstances, the best thing for a terrorist to succeed in his mission, and then get caught. He will get the best lawyers to defend him. He will get judges who are ever so solicitous about his rights, ever so finicky about procedures. And, of course, he will get activists to shoot off press statements on his behalf. Lawyers better, judges more solicitous, activists more articulate and better networked than any in his own country.

This is, it has for 20 years been, war. It can be won only by overwhelming the adversary — not by running after the terrorist, as K.P.S. Gill says, but by out-running him, indeed by over-running him. Not an eye for an eye. For an eye, both eyes. Not a tooth for a tooth. For a tooth, the whole jaw. Human rights? Yes, we will respect the human rights of the terrorists and their sponsors and their local supporters to the extent that they respect the human rights of our people.

Emphasis mine.

Terrorist attacks on Mumbai

Update [12-01-08]:

As more and more people on the streets show the disgust and anger against the entire political class Sonia Gandhi is trying to show as if she is with the people of the country and taking her party men to task.  Great pretence is on its way. Shivraj Patil, who is nothing but a political insignificance has been shown the door just five months before the elections when it actually makes no difference and he has inflicted the maximum damage to the post as well as the country.  Maharashtra’s Home Minister RR Patil has resigned too and the preparations are on to oust the Chief Minister Vilas Rao Deshmukh. To show how concerned she is she may sack the entire cabinet.  Basically she is only concerned about herself and her son’s political future. If she were so concerned she wouldn’t have appointed these political stooges in the first place but then this is too much to ask for in the current political scene in India.

There have also been some positive developments.  A large number of people turned up to cast votes and this really sent jitters among various political parties that thrive on the right people not casting their votes. The political outlook — at least for the time being — seems to be totally altered. Wherever these politicians go people surround them, boo them and refuse to entertain them.  Today in the morning I saw people mobbing Sanjay Nirupam when he went to attend apparently some public gathering.  Yesterday when the Kerela Chief Minister visited the martyred NSG commando Major Sandeep Unnikrishnan’s residence the father of the commando got really angry and didn’t allow the Chief Minister to enter his residence.  Various political parties didn’t allow the mourning family even to grieve privately. People are really disgusted and fed up with the current lot of politicians.  I think this is good change.  Even the local, highly opportunistic politicians like Amar Singh, Mulayam Yadav and Laloo Yadav have so far refrained from making public statements because in the past there have always been speaking in favor of Muslim terrorists and militants to garner Muslim votes. They know if they appear publicly and say something stupid and irresponsible people are going to burn them alive.

Another positive development is that the Muslims of Mumbai at the grassroots level have openly spoken against the recent terror attacks in which people from all the communities had to pay a heavy price, including Muslims. Muslims in Mumbai are demanding that the dead terrorists shouldn’t even get burying ground in the city. This is what an average Indian wants to see — only the Muslim community can constructively subvert such elements among them.  Although it is a law and order problem it is also an ideological problem.  There are many misguided Muslim youths and they become easy targets of fear mongers.  The Muslim intelligentsia and the elders should take up the responsibility of spreading awareness and a feeling of mutual wellness among the youth. A message should be sent that the world in general is not against the Muslims and Islam and every community wants to live in peace.  No jihads need to be fought and there is no danger to their culture and identity.

Update [11-30-08]:

India’s Home Minister Shivraj Patil resigned today in the wake of the recent terrorist attacks in Mumbai. The government is finally accepting that there was a big intelligence failure. Bullshit. Although previously I too had stated that it was an intelligence failure but on second thought I would like to say that the intelligence agencies must have had the information all along and it was the government that didn’t feel like taking the necessary steps. Taking steps would have meant arresting some local Muslims and this would have angered the Muslim community.

The Maharashtra Chief Minister was foolish enough to say that the government had an inkling about the operations but didn’t have precise information where they were going to strike.  How can you ever have the precise information?  Even the terrorists involved in the operation never have precise information, they are informed at the last minute.  Only those who plan the operations remotely know the exact location.

Shivraj Patil, is being used as a scapegoat because anyway he is of no use in whichever office he is, but this guy should have resigned months ago and in fact he shouldn’t have become the Home Minister in the first place. But then, our Prime Minister shouldn’t have become the Prime Minister in the first place and this government shouldn’t have been here in the first place.  Anyway, lots of mess, but this new development is like that Hindi saying: aasman se gire khajoor me atke that means you fall from the skies and you get stuck upon the pine, whatever that means. The portfolio of the Home Ministry is going to be with P. Chidambram who can be indisputably credited with the current economic mess in the country.  I wonder what he’s going to do as the Home Minister. But then, I think anybody can be better than Shivraj Patil, even our building’s dhobi (this is just a hypothetical comparison, by no means I intend to insult the dhobi by comparing him with the outgoing Home Minister).

Update [11-29-08]:

The siege is finally over and the Islamic terrorists have been smoked out of all the establishments in Mumbai.  In the morning I was watching TV and every channel was telecasting the last rites being performed for the dead commandos and policemen. The politicians were conspicuously missing and I think it was a good thing — people would have stoned them. What needless deaths.  These kinds of attacks happen because our policymakers can never arrive at a consensus on how to tackle various terrorist outfits. The commandos, soldiers and policemen had to pay for the follies of our politicians, and of course for our inaction and a sense of disinterest in the daily affairs of the country.

I was commenting a few days ago that our policemen and soldiers can easily be termed as one of the best in the world.  Fine, they do seem lanky, malnourished, clueless and demotivated, given the conditions they have to work under I think whatever they achieve must be highly appreciated. Our policemen don’t even have the basic facilities like proper clothes, protective gears and guns.  In fact most of the guns are as old as 1857, if you can believe that. They are not trained, they are not educated, nobody respects them and they are heavily underpaid. Despite that, they rushed to the spots where the terrorists had attacked with latest weapons and a high degree of motivation. I think people of this country should put immense pressure on the government to halt all unnecessary expenses and invest heavily on building the police force from ground up; lots of money should be spent on making our policemen healthy, well-informed and well-equipped. It’s no use holding grand events like the Commonwealth Games when our policemen look like kids running around with toy guns and ill-fitting clothes.

I also couldn’t help thinking about Raj Thakrey and even Bal Thackrey. I wonder where these dudes are these days. Nobody even paid a visit to the attack sites.  Didn’t they want to save their city? In fact I thought they would protest that why commandos and marines were coming from all over the country to fight with the terrorists; only Marathi commandos and marines should have been allowed to tackle the situation.  The commandos and the policemen who died fighting the Islamic terrorists did not just belong to Maharashtra, they came from all over India. I hope the people of Mumbai will begin to ignore these thugs and work together for the physical and moral reconstruction of the city. Apparently Raj Thakrey went to ATS chief Hemant Karkare’s house to pay condolences but Karkare’s wife refused to let him in.  Good decision.

The country, surely has come out stronger this time.  Of course the politicians will try to bake their own breads in the current heat but people basically understand that they too are a big part of the problem.  Precisely this was the reason why barring Narendra Modi no particular politician tried to draw mileage out of this attack — they knew it would only infuriate the public.  People are also thinking, now that the extremely rich have been targeted the government will be forced to take positive action and rise above partisan politics and vote bank mentality.

My heart also goes out to hundreds of pigeons who died and got injured during this ghastly operation.

Update [11-27-08]: I was just going through this blog post by Dr. Mani (he is a renowned Internet marketer and I have been reading his articles since early 2000) in which he says:

So that you can actually FEEL the way they do.

Can you empathize with a 20 year old terrorist? Feel the way he did when he stormed ashore, carrying lethal weapons, prepared to claim innocent lives - and ready to die in the process? Are you capable of placing your own perspectives and values on hold to try and imagine, for even a passing moment, what might drive such insane behavior?

Maybe not. Especially when, like the vast majority of normal people, the behavior flies in the face of everything you hold sacred and important.

Yet, unless you can place yourself in their shoes, trying hard to understand what motivates, drives and powers them to such desperate acts of destruction and horror, I submit that you should neither sit in judgment on their actions, nor presume to be able to resolve the ensuing conflict.

Because at its core lies something inherently human, universal, and extremely potent at blinding our eyes and binding our hands against the effort.

Our egoism.

I intended to leave a comment on this blog post but one needs to log in.  Although I do agree with Dr. Mani’s sentiment I wonder why we only need to be in the shoes of the perpetrators and not in the shoes of the innocent victims who have no business with their cause.  For instance, how does it become my problem when some people only like to talk the language of gun and destruction? If we try to understand their problem, it’s like the prey trying to reason it out with the predator. When you are attacked and you are in danger of dying you don’t try to study the motivation behind the attack, you try to kill the attacker or at least save yourself.  Studying can be postponed to a later stage when things are a bit more conducive for such constructive activities.

Again, empathizing with perpetrators definitely leads to long-term solutions and this can be applied to any kind of crime may it be rape, mass murderer and large-scale destruction. There is something that motivates a rapist, there is something that motivates a murderer, and there is something that motivates a terrorist to kill innocent people (of course you can always say that due to inaction and callousness these people lose their right to be called innocent, but that would be a different topic of discussion). Every civilized society must study why criminals behave the way they do.

Yes, the moment you start killing people you become a criminal no matter what is the motivation.  This is high time we stopped finding excuses for terrorist acts and dealt with them the way we deal other crimes.  I’m not saying it against some religion — this should be applicable to all religions and communities.

The old post follows:

The very first thing that comes my mind is how such a large scale terrorist operation (also see a WikiPedia page on 26 November 2008 Mumbai attacks) can be executed without the country’s intelligence agencies getting a whiff of it. An army of terrorists holding a metropolitan city under siege is not scary; the scary part is neither the police nor the politicians and administrators had a clue. The scarier part is that they can do it again and they can do it anywhere. Are we going to learn a lesson? The history says we won’t.

Of course this is not the time to point fingers; this is the time to tackle the situation. But the situation cannot be tackled with the same ostrich mentality.

It must have taken the terrorists at least 2-3 months to plan and mobilize so many people with lots of local support. Were the dudes in the anti-terrorist intelligence agencies napping all the time or they purposely didn’t take action? Taking action would have meant arresting some people from a particular community and this would have harmed our country’s “secular” image. It is really unbelievable that everything happened without the knowledge of the law enforcement bodies. We live in an extremely interconnected world, it is simply not possible to contain such a massive secret.

The last time I saw the news on TV, they had set many rooms of Taj Mahal Hotel on fire (someone on twitter said that the top portion of the hotel is collapsing), killed numerous foreigners, and taken hostage a Parsi community. The attacks had started last night with random bomb explosions and AK-47 firings at various places in Mumbai. Three top brass police officers have been martyred. The apologists are going to have a field day, as usual, as the rest of the country tries to make sense of this avoidable tragedy.

Here are some helpline numbers.

A couple of first person accounts by bloggers:

Amit Verma
Sonia Faleiro

In India you are secular only if you do Hindu bashing

Mai sent me this link about Taslima Nasreen not being allowed to stay in India. What’s her fault? She has offended Muslim fundamentalists by writing against Islam or Muslim practices. Nothing unnatural in that I guess. But do you ever wonder why the mainstream media quietly ignores her? Obama sets off a litany of chest beatings by selecting Sonal Shah who allegedly has links with some Hindu fundamentalist organizations, but hardly anybody has a few thoughts to spare on the shabby treatment Taslima Nasreen gets in our democratic, secular country. The reason is simple; she is writing against Muslims and not against Hindus, which is the current fashion.

The same people would have had a field day had she written something offensive against the Hindus and if she had to leave the country because of them. Blog posts would have been written, columns would have been churned out and copious debates would have been telecast.

When I’m writing this I’m not trying to create a Hindu-Muslim divide, I’m just stating a simple, blatant observation, because this does happen.  In India being secular means that you have to criticize everything Hindu and find excuses and reasons for the remaining religions.  I wonder from where this mentality emanates and I wonder if it exists in other countries too. These people are perpetually criticizing the very fabric that gives them the freedom to indulge in such obscurantism. Does their heart bleed for the downtrodden, for the suppressed, for the victims?  This is debatable because you may find downtrodden, suppressed and victimized people in almost every community. Do they love justice?  Then why such a muted response in the case of Taslima Nasreen?

I don’t know whether it is fear or some deep-rooted conspiracy.  Everybody loves to be a champion. It is very easy to stand up against a force that is not ruthless and anarchic.  As my wife always says, “Muslims ke against ye log bolenge te vo pichvade main dunda daal denge”: if they say anything against the Muslims the Muslims will screw them in the ass with sticks, and to a great extent this is true.  Hindus, on the other hand are not that vindictive and violent so it is easier to stand up against them and accuse them of everything under the sun. I think this is precisely the reason why nobody stands up in support of Taslima Nasreen and a writer who enrages Hindu sentiments or a painter who paints naked gods and goddesses (personally I have no problem with that) find ample support from the so-called secularists.

Trying to read Shakespeare - Antony and Cleopatra

I have been planning to read Shakespeare for many years but whenever I take up the task it seems so daunting.  Call it lack of time or lack of desire for the required effort; I have never been able to go beyond even the first scenes of the first acts.  I wish I had graduated in English literature because then I would have had to read and understand these great works.  The only classical writers I have read so far comprehensively are Dostoyevsky, to an extent Kafka, and of course Charles Dickens.  I have read Hardy too but somehow I don’t consider him a classical writer. There are so many great writers I haven’t even heard of.  I think the more I read the more I’ll know about them.  I firmly believe that good reading helps you become a better writer.  If nothing else reading gives you lots of thoughts to think about.

In order to make my Shakespeare reading easier I am first reading the notes prepared by various teachers, professors and even students.  I can find lots of them easily on the Internet.

The first play that I’m reading is "Antony and Cleopatra".  There was no specific reason behind it, I chose it randomly.  For a long time I used to believe that Ptolemy was Cleopatra’s immediate brother whereas in reality he was an ancestor who was a general in Alexander’s army.  A few centuries before Cleopatra, Ptolemy had come in possession of Egypt when Alexander died. So this way Cleopatra was a Greek and not an Egyptian.

Mark Antony was a mighty general in Caesar’s army.  The romance between Mark Antony and Cleopatra "blossomed" after Julius Caesar’s death; Cleopatra was going around with him before he died.  After Julius Caesar’s death Octavius Caesar started ruling Rome with the help of Mark Antony and another character I am yet to come across.

Till now I’ve reached the part where, upon hearing about his wife’s death Mark Antony leaves the conniving Cleopatra to help Caesar fight Rome’s enemies and Caesar is bitching about Antony’s debaucheries in Egypt.

My initial thoughts: if I am looking for something deeper in this literature I haven’t found it yet because most of the time I’m struggling with the language.  I have a strong grasp over the contemporary language but there are many expressions in Shakespearean literature (in fact, in all older texts) I have never come across.  Everything ends with a "eth" or an "er" it seems and it being a play there are lots of simple things expressed intricately.  That said, reading extra notes prior to reading the actual text has definitely helped and I am already in the scene 4 of the act 1. It hasn’t become enjoyable but I can feel it that soon it will.

As I mentioned above I have wanted to read classical literature for a long time.  Aside from this reason I also wanted to stretch my mind; indulge in something I find inconvenient. So I have decided to not only read the classical texts but also write about them in various blog posts here.  And anyway when I had started this blog I had thought of sharing my literary progress here (that’s why the name Writing Cave) but then the vicissitudes of life took me to other directions and I ended up writing about almost everything under the sun.  I will still be writing about everything under the sun but hopefully I will be discussing more literature from now onwards.

Big fuss over Sonal Shah and her RSS links

The media and even the blogsphere is abuzz with the new name on the political bloc: Sonal Shah. In a desperate attempt to prove their secular credentials many people are questioning her links with the RSS (Rashriya Swayam Sevak Sangh: the national Association of volunteers) as soon as the news broke that she has been handpicked by Barack Obama as an adviser for his transition team. The problem of the secular brigade (can’t believe I’m using such expressions) with Sonal Shah is that she was a relief worker working with the VHP after the 2001 earthquake. She is also known to have close links with the RSS and to make the matters worse, she was facilitated by the devil himself – Narendra Modi. According to them these are sufficient reasons to brand somebody communal and nationalistic. This link nicely profiles her recent activities:

Shah has worked at Andersen Consulting, Goldman Sachs and the US treasury. She has been with the liberal think tank, Center for American Progress, and the Soros Foundation at the US treasury. She worked in post-conflict Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo and crisis-ridden Indonesia. With her siblings Anand and Roopal, she set up Indicorps, which brings young Americans of Indian origin to India to work on specific projects. This is the kind of resume that makes many Indians disproportionately proud.

Oh! But no, the only thing that matters is that she has links with the RSS.

RSS is a needlessly maligned organization in India. There are many religion-based organizations all over the world engaged in social work and other socially relevant/irrelevant activities. There are numerous Christian organizations, Muslim organizations (are there Sikh organizations too working for/against the community?) and many of these organizations run communal agendas but nobody seems to have an issue with them. Now, I’m not saying that if these organizations run communal agendas then the others should too follow suit – in fact recently I joined a “ban VHP” group on FaceBook because of its nefarious activities. All I’m saying is merely associating with RSS and VHP shouldn’t make a person who is a director at Google’s philanthropic arm, “bad”. Just like Muslim and Christian organizations that want to motivate their youth to work for the communities RSS too motivates and encourages Hindu youth to build a healthier, stronger nation and I don’t see anything wrong in that.

Our universe is a part of something bigger

I wonder why it comes as a surprise to physicists and scientists that our universe is a part of something like a "multiverse". A new study has revealed that there are some unknown matters that are continuously tugging at our known universe.  There is an expression that exists in Sikh Scriptures that says:

Lakh akaashan akaash
Lakh patalan pataal

Which means there are millions (countless) of skies above and millions of sky beneath.  Sky means the universe: akaash is something that exists overhead and pataal is something that exists beneath the earth we walk upon.

Besides, the universe has to be somewhere no matter how big it is.  There is always something bigger.

Barak Obama Wins

Jubilant crowds after Obama’s victory

This, and a few more photographs from NYTimes, brought tears to my eyes not only because they symbolize the triumph of democracy and defeat of racial prejudice (to some extent) but also because I’m not going to see such images in India, where politics has totally been taken over by the mob and corrupt politicians. At the times of elections you see goons and goons-turned-politicians roaming the streets brazenly and capturing booths wherever possible, and citizens preferring to stay indoors because they don’t want to get embroiled in such a fiasco.

But I do admit that such political and social changes come from grassroots level and you cannot simply keep on blaming the corrupt politicians, the conniving mediapersons and the pseudo-secularists that perpetually support and promote such politicians and goons. The forefathers of people visible in the above photograph celebrating the victory of Barak Obama  must have suffered worst atrocities and prejudices in order to bring their generations to the present juncture.  This shows that the real change happens only when people on the streets get involved.  Simply ranting and commiserating over the state of affairs doesn’t do any good.

Ever since I have become a father I have become more sensitive towards the politics of the country and the social alterations that keep on happening.  Every development, for worse or for better is going to affect the way my child spends her life in this country or somewhere else.  The change will come when we all start worrying about our children and taking proactive steps in the real sense.