A Deal with the Devil

The Government of Pakistan recently announced a truce with the Taliban in Swat in the Malakhand region of Pakistan which is merely three hours away from the city of Islamabad. Swat, known as the Switzerland of Pakistan, which presented the picture of serenity, wherein nature was its best without being blemished by human intervention, which used to be a paradise for honeymooners and also winter sports is now a haven for terrorism.

The Taliban which has been making significant progress in the region has now probably claimed their biggest victory till date since the time they were ousted from power in Afghanistan. What surprises me is the way the Government of Pakistan has caved in to this terror outfit and has actually negotiated a peace pact with them instead of trying to eliminate them completely or at least suppress them. What is even more surprising is the way the Government has gone on to distinguish Taliban as the good Taliban and bad Taliban. The group headed by Sufi Mohammed who fought against the Russians in the 70's and 80's under Osama Bin Laden and his estranged son-in-law Maulana Fazlullah is being called the "Good Taliban" and the group headed by Baitullah Mehsud who has been accused of master-minding the assassination of Benazir Bhutto is being called the "Bad Taliban." I am confused about a silly thing pertaining to this issue – Which of the two is the Height's of Stupidity – Brokering a Peace Deal with a Devil or differentiating the Devil as the good half and the bad half. The Government of Pakistan must know this – there is only one Taliban which is not fit for any kind of peace deals. Can anyone sign a "peace" deal with a person or people in this case who carry Kalashnikov rifles 24/7? Not to mention the posse of rocket launchers behind the leader. This development is not dangerous to Pakistan alone, but to the neighboring states of Afghanistan and India on the western and eastern borders of Pakistan respectively. The threat to India may not be imminent, but at the same time cannot be ruled out by any means. Afghanistan on the other hand has been fighting the Taliban from the Bajaur region on their side of the border. A much bigger threat posed by this dangerous situation is the fact that the Taliban plays host to Osama Bin Laden. And as long as the Taliban are allowed control of the Swat valley, the Zardari Government may also be guaranteeing Osama Bin Laden's safety.

The imposition of the Sharia law in the Taliban occupied region is another crime against society. The kinds of ban imposed on women in the name of the law can be called a social evil in itself – restricting women from leaving their houses without wearing a burqa and to be always accompanied by a male member of the family, restricting girls from going to schools, not allowing women to work is totally irrational and unacceptable. Why the gender bias? How can such restrictions help in the service of the Almighty? And the atrocities meted out against people especially women who defy the "fatwas" against immoral behavior are unimaginable. The public torture, deaths by public hanging or deaths by means of stoning the culprits actually exhibit the cowardice of the Taliban.

Courtesy - CNN IBN, URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFBsVbwBgLU

The deal with the Taliban which has been negotiated amidst media reports that the Government has paid a whopping $6 million, can only be rationalized as way sought to bring peace in the Swat region and temporarily halt the war against the Taliban which has till now claimed the lives of thousands of innocent civilians and brave soldiers and has also led to destruction of one of the most scenic spots of Pakistan. But even this does not answer the question as to how did the Government allow such unchecked growth of the Taliban that they could become as powerful as to form a Parallel Government.

Although the Government would want to regain power in the region without any bloodshed, I very much doubt such possibilities. Evacuation of the people in Swat was something that the government should have done before the Taliban gained control of the region. And this isn't a hostage situation for the Government to negotiate with the Taliban in exchange of the inhabitants of Swat. Personally, I am not for further negotiations with the Taliban as this only gives more bargaining power to the terrorists. The Government now needs to quickly come up with a plan to counter-attack and eliminate the Taliban completely – be it the good Taliban or the bad Taliban. This will however, result in civilian casualties again, but I would like to ask two questions –

1. Can we expect the Taliban to rule the land without actually killing people who stray away from the Sharia law or who can be daring enough to question their authority?


2. Can the Taliban be allowed to continue rule over the Swat region with no one to question them, which could even lead to their growth?

Courtesy: Sarabdaran [User - YouTube].

Please also visit: www.youtube.com/rawa77 for more videos on human rights disaster in Afghanistan due to the Taliban rule

Recommended read: A Kite Runner - Khaled Hosseini
A Thousand Splendid Suns - Khaled Hosseini

Scolari sacked!!!

I have this unusual habit f reading the newspaper backwards, starting from the sports section, moving to business, followed by International, Editorial and finishing it off with National and State and City.

So one of the first headlines that I read earlier today was the firing of Chelsea’s manager Luiz Felipe Scolari from his job!!! It really came as a surprise to me. Just last night I remember visiting a particular sports website which I regularly visit for the Football updates and one of the headlines on the website was the sacking of Portsmouth’s manager Tony Adams and addressing him as No. 31. The 31st manager in the EPL to be sacked from his job. But there was absolutely no mention of Scolari being fired from his job, even as late as 10.00 pm in the night. So, imagine my surprise when I realized that Scolari was No. 32.

As a fan of EPL and also Chelsea in particular I was and still am a big supporter of Luiz Felipe Scolari. I have admired the skills and attacking attitude of Scolari since the time he coached Brazil to their World Cup victory in 2002. He followed it up with an impressive show with Portugal in the next World Cup in 2006 where Portugal was eliminated in the semi-finals. The Euro 2008 campaign with Portugal was also pretty successful considering that Portugal was one among the final four. Scolari as a coach brings in a positive mentality into the team and has never been afraid of trying new things. He is one of those managers who keep pressing for more goals even after scoring a decisive first. He is not the one of those defensive types who tries to protect the lead than going in for the kill with more aggressive strategies. He is the 4-3-3 type than the usual 4-4-2.

When he was announced as the successor of Avram Grant in the middle of Euro 2008, I was so excited and imagined good times ahead for Chelsea in the current season. He did start off impressively by not losing in the first eight games going neck to neck with Liverpool. Scolari tasted his first loss in Chelsea colors when Chelsea lost at home to Liverpool. It was also Chelsea’s first home loss since 86 games. Stamford Bridge which was considered to be fortress was breached for the first time since the past two seasons. A remarkable run coming to an end. Chelsea have since lost couple of more games at the Bridge and have dropped more points at home than away. His task wasn’t made any easier with key players having to be rested due to injuries. Drogba, who started this season with an injury has been playing in fits and starts ever since being declared fit to play which was probably since late November, Carvalho has had sit out many games due hamstring injury, Ballack was out of the team at the beginning of the season and recently Joe Cole pulled out of the rest of season due to injury. Michael Essien is yet to make a return since the time he injured himself when playing for his country. Captain John Terry also had to take few games off due to back injury. Cynics might argue that injuries are part of the game – but losing key player’s game after game does not help a winning cause, moreover Scolari was not even given too many grants during the January transfer window and had to bring in Ricardo Quaresma on loan.

At the end of it all, anyone – player or coach should be given sufficient time to prove themselves and seven months is not at all close to being sufficient. Plus, the players also need to understand the coach. The coach and the players have to be allowed gel with each other. Abramovich has now sacked three coaches within a span of one and half years. How does he expect “anyone” for that matter to show convincing results? Jose Mourinho was sacked because he was playing too monotonously and his style of play wasn’t attractive enough for Abramovich. I still don’t know why Avram Grant was thrown away. I just guess it was because Chelsea could not bag any title in the last season and now Scolari has been sacked without allowing him even one complete season at the helm.
I am not the one who likes Manchester United or Alex Ferguson but I have to agree with him when he reacted at Scolari’s exit saying “The world has no patience”. Alex Ferguson and Arsene Wenger have been with their respective teams since a decade, be it good times or bad. In the similar fashion I believe one of the past three coaches [including Scolari] should have been allowed to continue as the manager of Chelsea. If either Alex Ferguson or Arsene Wenger would have been fired based on one season’s performance, I doubt if Manchester United or Arsenal could have reached the heights that they have today.

The next coach of Chelsea better be ready to take over the team without any hopes of clinging to the manager’s post for far too long. He should know that his job is an insecure one, one which can be snatched without any reason and at anytime of the season, because success alone doesn’t guarantee a Chelsea manager’s job security, there are lots of other things that go into it, one of which is Roman Abramovich itself.

Love Day or Hate Day???

Valentine’s Day – A day celebrated as a mark of respect to St. Valentine, a day celebrated to celebrate Love. But in the past few years we have been witnessing certain section of the society condemn this celebration terming it as “Western Culture”. If Valentine’s Day is a Western Influence on “Indian Tradition/Culture,” then can’t we call Mother’s Day, Father’s Day and even New Year’s Day also as a Western Influence and condemn the same. What is needed in this case is a clear definition of Western Culture and Western Influence and clearly differentiate it from Indian Tradition/Culture.

What absolutely cannot be permitted and tolerated is violence in the name of condemnation. How can people who use violence as means of spreading the message be called “Protectors” of culture and tradition? Does Indian culture preach violence? Is our culture so weak that it needs to be protected? Can any culture sustain over the long run when it permits violence for its own protection? If violence against such celebrations is allowed in the name of condemnation, then a day wouldn’t be far off when even Christianity and Islam are seen as a foreign influence on the supposedly “Indian Culture” and people who follow these religions would be attacked as well. We have already witnessed outrageous attacks on Churches in such cities as Bangalore and Mangalore.

I only see this as an attempt by the so called protectors to gain public and media attention in order gain political mileage. In this age of media outreach, one such publicity can draw the attention from various classes of the society no matter how varied their opinions would be. With previously well established non-secularist, pro-Hindu and if I can go on to say political parties with retrograde ideologies already having laid firm foundations in the country – it only goes on to serve the purpose for these new organizations that are still in their infancy stage and need the media attention to popularize them.

We have to ask ourselves a question – How are these organizations thriving in spite of the flak drawn by wide sections of the public?

The answer I feel lies in our weak legal system. “Moral Policing” is the term used by the media to address the actions of these organizations. Here comes the second question – Do we really need Moral Policing? Public Displays of Affection [PDA] is something that is seen as inappropriate, vulgar and crossing the lines of decency. Restricting people from such acts is acceptable, however, stopping them celebrating Valentine’s day or if it means going out along with their partners and beating them up and campaigning against what they call as Western Culture is unacceptable. The problem lies in the Police System. The police in India are by a large extent influenced and used by the politicians. The police have become toys in the hands of the politicians. Taking action against such organizations which do enjoy political backing is seen as inviting “unwanted” trouble. The Judicial system also needs to be blamed in this issue. A system which grants bail to these perpetrators and allows them to roam around scot-free, a system which takes years to acquit a criminal does not raise fear in the minds of criminals. What is needed is a judicial system which can take immediate and quick action against everyone involved in such acts – both directly and indirectly.

What also needs to be done is a complete revamp of the police department. The public lack faith in the police department. The police are by large seen as only being reactive than being pro-active. When people have been repeating these acts every year over and over again, steps must be taken to prevent such activities from taking place. The Law Must Prevail. Fear of political backlash should not keep the men in uniform from performing their duty. Public support in favor of the police can go a long way in boosting the morale and confidence of the police.

But the root cause for such unlawful activities actually lies in the political backing and also the support gained by a handful of people from the society. Politicians actually breed such organizations for their own benefits. As long as the leaders of the country are not clean, you can’t expect the society to be clean of such rogue elements.