Share this story!            

SECOND OPINION: Two ‘revolutionary’ generals —Khaled Ahmed’s TV Review

The Islamic world is divided and at cross purposes. A victory of the Muslim masses against their own elites could be more disastrous than a defeat of America imagined by Hameed Gul who ruled Pakistan as ISI chief for a time and gave it the misdirection that led to its misfortunes

Hameed Gul and Aslam Beg are ‘revolutionary’ in their different ways. Both agree on the removal of American hegemony. Both want the Islamic world to defy American influence. They want violent change because peace means American dominance. Their rhetoric is unaffected by circumstances that prove them wrong again and again.

ARY (September 25, 2005) Dr Shahid Masood discussed the international scene with Hameed Gul who said that the Sunni-Shia massacre in Iraq was being organised by Israel. He said if Iran declared war against America all the Muslims will gather under one flag and the mujahideen who were without much to do would start fighting again.

He said Europe will be tied to America’s leg. Now the war will be waged by the West against Muslims. Pakistan too would be affected. Dr Masood said that Arabs were heard saying they were more scared of the Iranian bomb than the Israeli bomb. Gul replied that the common man did not think like that. He said Shia-Sunni trouble will end as the Muslims united. He said America may attack and occupy the oil producing regions in Saudi Arabia. That was its old plan.

The Shia-Sunni conflict is deep-rooted. In Iraq its roots lie also in the long dictatorship of Saddam Hussein. Israel may be the ‘rejoicing third party’ but both communities hate Israel with great animus. As for America attacking Saudi Arabia, past evidence points to the contrary. Iraq could have attacked it after its invasion of Kuwait, but the world got together to defend its source of oil and defeated Iraq.

The Islamic world is divided and at cross purposes. A victory of the Muslim masses against their own elites could be more disastrous than a defeat of America imagined by Hameed Gul who ruled Pakistan as ISI chief and gave it the misdirection that led to its misfortunes.

ARY (September 28, 2005) Dr Shahid Masood talked to Aslam Beg who said that Iran was a brave country and had already won a war against Iraq. He said Iran had the right to acquire nuclear power. He said Iran had referred to the Quran against the bomb which should be accepted. Dr Masood added that Israel and America were assisting the Kurds which had offended the Turks. Aslam Beg said he had not sold nuclear secrets to Iran.

Iran’s bravery rides on top of a society that is under pressure. From $18 billion as oil revenue Iran’s income has swelled to $73 billion. To ask Pakistan to do the same as a ‘brave and honourable’ state without that kind of revenue would be unrealistic. Iran’s reference to the Quran is not believed by anyone including the Arabs who fear the Iranian bomb.

Who is right, Pakistan who pegged its bomb to Sura Anfal of the Quran, or Ayatollah Khamenei who says that the Quran actually forbids the making of the nuclear bomb? Aslam Beg was Pakistan’s army chief. It shows that Pakistan runs the risk of being ruled by very idiosyncratic generals. That’s why Pakistan must have democracy.

GEO (September 21, 2005) Choti Khabar Bari Baat discussed disappearance of sheltered girls from a Darul Iman of Gujranwala with human rights activist Asma Jehangir, government adviser Saba and former Lahore High Court judge Nasira Iqbal. A documentary showed the lady in charge of Darul Iman, Lilly, saying that she had not received the budget from the government for the last two months and therefore the food was bad and sanitation poor. The police officer who went to the shelter said that the stink there was unbearable.

Saba said she had visited the place but was in denial about what she saw on TV. Justice Nasira Iqbal said it was difficult to deny that conditions there were bad and the women had to run away. Ms Jehangir said confining the women and disallowing movement was illegal. Justice Nasira Iqbal said that shelters should be put under a mixed body of custodians to prevent mismanagement by public servants.

It was a sorry spectacle after the government adviser Saba was proved wrong but would not admit it. This programme should tell us something about the government’s new resolve to look after the orphans of the earthquake.

ARY (September 21, 2005) minister Qudsia Lodhi, Prof Mughisuddin and film producer Syed Noor discussed culture. The audience was full of modern girls who could not speak Urdu properly. They protested that Pakistani culture was contaminated by such Hindu cultural festivals as diwali, basant and such Western cultural rituals as Valentine’s Day.

While themselves using English words, they kept praising the Japanese for speaking their language alone. One girl who ranted against Western culture was speaking English and was without hijab. One in hijab complained that all present were distant from Islam because they were not familiar with their own religion.

The programme exposed our confused progress through modernity. All the students were unable to speak Urdu clearly but were critical of modernity and mixing of cultural traditions. No one spoke of the economic advantage of knowing English. Had the discussion gone further, an extremist conclusion was inevitable, asking for the abolition of what has stood for culture. All Muslims finally recede to the utopia that the Taliban achieved in Afghanistan.

ARY (September 29, 2005) Dr Shahid Masood talked to Dr Zakir Naek about Jerusalem becoming an international city to which Dr Naek replied that instead of that Christians and Jews should be shown verses from the Old and New Testaments and convinced that both scriptures predicted the coming of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Once they accepted that then it would be fine to retain the city as it is for all three.

Dr Naek’s case rests on the presumption that Christians and Jews would welcome his debunking of their orthodox beliefs and that, in a way, they would accept defeat at his hands. His da’wa is based on falsifying others’ faiths and is aimed at their conversion by insulting what they have believed in. On the other hand, there is nothing exemplary in the conduct of the Muslims to indicate that by embracing Islam anyone can become a better person. *

Home | Editorial

Share this story!