Kesedaran krisis global

Sepanjang tahun 2008, dunia telah dikejutkan dengan pelbagai krisis yang datang bertali arus. Negara kita turut sama menerima badai krisis globalisasi yang agak memeritkan. Apa yang diungkapkan sebagai 'dunia tanpa sempadan' sememangnya menyediakan cabaran hebat buat negara dan rakyat.

Pelbagai krisis global yang melanda pada tahun 2008 seharusnya dijadikan iktibar dan pengajaran dalam meniti hari di tahun-tahun yang mendatang. Tahun 2008 boleh dianggap sebagai tahun penuh krisis sehingga memaksa manusia di serata dunia untuk peka terhadap persekitaran dan bersedia untuk beradaptasi dengan suasana yang tidak menentu.

Sekurang-kurangnya terdapat empat krisis global yang melanda dunia pada tahun 2008. Iaitu krisis bencana alam, krisis makanan, krisis kenaikan harga minyak dan krisis ekonomi global.

Krisis bencana alam besar pada tahun ini bermula dengan Taufan Nargis yang melanda Myanmar. Tragedi ini telah mengakibatkan 85,000 kematian dan 35,000 orang hilang di Myanmar. Bencana tersebut turut menjejaskan sektor pertanian khususnya tanaman padi yang merupakan nadi penggerak utama ekonomi Myanmar.

Ia juga telah memberi implikasi terhadap bekalan beras di negara-negara sekitarnya. Pada 12 Mei 2008 pula di wilayah Sichuan, China berlaku gempa bumi yang dahsyat sehingga mengorbankan 69,227 nyawa.

Wilayah Sichuan hampir lenyap dari peta dunia setelah hampir seluruh infrastruktur termasuk sekolah dan bangunan kediaman runtuh digegar bumi. Lazimnya setelah berlakunya bencana ia memerlukan kos yang tinggi untuk melaksanakan program pemulihan dan pembangunan semula.

Krisis kenaikan harga makanan di pasaran global, turut berlaku pada awal tahun 2008. Kenaikan harga bijirin seperti gandum, beras dan jagung berlaku di kebanyakan negara. Keadaan ini telah mencetuskan keadaan huru-hara di beberapa buah negara. Antara negara yang paling teruk dilanda krisis makanan ialah Brazil, Mexico, Filipina dan Indonesia sehingga mencetuskan demonstrasi jalanan dan mogok lapar.

Ada beberapa faktor yang dikaitkan dengan krisis makanan. Pertama; kekurangan pengeluaran disebabkan oleh faktor perubahan iklim sehingga menyebabkan kemarau, banjir besar dan taufan memberi kesan terhadap hasil pengeluaran pertanian.

Kedua; kenaikan harga minyak menyebabkan inflasi terhadap harga makanan. Ketiga; pengeluaran bahan api bio yang mengunakan hasil pertanian (jagung) memberi kesan terhadap keluaran makanan.

Negara kita juga mengalami masalah kekurangan bekalan beras di pasaran tempatan. Ini memaksa kerajaan mengadakan beberapa polisi dan tindakan bagi mengawal kenaikan harga beras. Langkah yang diambil kerajaan dapat mengawal keadaan dengan baik.

Selain itu kerajaan juga berusaha mengukuhkan sektor industri padi dengan mengenal pasti kawasan luas di Sabah dan Sarawak untuk dimajukan sebagai projek penanaman padi negara.

Dunia di tahun 2008 terus dikejutkan dengan kenaikan harga minyak mentah di pasaran global secara mendadak sehingga mendorong kenaikan inflasi yang tinggi. Keadaan ini telah memaksa rakyat untuk mengubah amalan terhadap penggunaan bahan api. Pelbagai saranan dicadangkan semata-mata untuk menggantikan bahan api fosil dengan menggunakan tenaga boleh diperbaharui.

Perdana Menteri turut memberikan saranan yang sama untuk negara membangunkan tenaga boleh diperbaharui (Renewable Energy Technology - RET) semasa majlis penyampaian Anugerah Bandar Lestari 2006/2007 dan Anugerah Langkawi pada 5 Jun 2008. Cadangan ini wajar dilaksanakan untuk membina wajah baru sumber tenaga negara.

Di penghujung tahun 2008, harga minyak di pasaran dunia turun dengan mendadaknya. Ini disertai dengan krisis ekonomi global yang semakin memuncak. Harga minyak mentah turun ke paras AS$40 setong, terendah dalam tempoh empat tahun. Pada 6 dan 7 Oktober 2008, pasaran saham dunia mengalami kerugian yang dianggarkan sebanyak 23.1 trilion dolar.

Meningkat

Kemuraman ekonomi dunia dijangka akan berterusan sehingga tahun hadapan. Ini diikuti dengan kadar pengangguran dijangka meningkat disebabkan pemberhentian kerja di beberapa buah syarikat perindustrian yang terpaksa gulung tikar disebabkan menanggung kerugian yang amat tinggi.

Dalam konteks negara kita harga minyak sawit mentah dan harga getah turut menerima nasib yang sama. Hakikatnya, golongan pekebun kecil sawit dan getah adalah mereka yang menerima impaknya.

Setiap kali krisis berlaku pelbagai cadangan diberikan untuk mengatasinya. Tidak kurang juga pelan tindakan dibuat bagi menangani masalah yang berlaku. Namun cadangan tidak sepatutnya tinggal begitu sahaja tanpa ada kesungguhan mendalam untuk melaksanakannya. Dalam konteks rakyat Malaysia, kita seharusnya mengambil iktibar apa yang telah berlaku dan bersedia untuk menghadapi saat-saat krisis yang bakal menimpa di masa hadapan.

Penghujung dan awal tahun (Masihi dan Hijrah) adalah masa yang terbaik untuk kita bermuhasabah dan merancang persiapan yang lebih kukuh pada masa hadapan. Fokus 2009, perlu diberikan perhatian mengikut keutamaan yang jelas.

Bagi individu dan keluarga perancangan kerjaya dan kewangan seharusnya diberi fokus yang utama. Perbelanjaan seharusnya dirancang secara berhemah pada setiap keadaan sama ada senang atau susah. Yang paling penting jangan membazir wang dan masa untuk sesuatu yang tidak berfaedah.

Di kala bencana menimpa, tiada siapa yang dapat membantu kita seratus peratus. Seandainya kita mempunyai simpanan kewangan, ia dapat meringankan bebanan kita.

Bagi organisasi swasta dan NGO, saat ini adalah saat yang terbaik untuk merancang aktiviti dengan mengambil kira faktor semasa yang serba tidak menentu. Fokus dan matlamat organisasi seharusnya jelas dan mantap serta dikongsi bersama dengan setiap ahli.

Kesuraman ekonomi yang diramal berlaku pada tahun 2009, seharusnya dijadikan pertimbangan. Program kebajikan, sosial dan masyarakat seharusnya tidak terhenti di saat kita menghadapi krisis ekonomi.

Jadi kesimpulan terpenting, setiap ahli dalam masyarakat seharusnya sedar dan faham tentang krisis global yang melanda dunia hari ini. Ini kerana semua yang berlaku di luar sana mungkin juga akan berlaku di dalam negara kita.

Proses kesedaran hanya akan mampu dibina melalui peningkatan budaya ilmu dalam masyarakat melalui pembacaan. Masyarakat akan mampu beradaptasi dengan suasana yang mencabar andainya sedar akan krisis yang berlaku di sekitar mereka.

[Baca]

Israel abai suara dunia

Menteri Pertahanan Israel Ehud Barak, berikrar bahawa Pasukan Pertahanan Israel (IDF) akan menggunakan setiap sumber tenaga untuk mengakhiri serangan roket dari wilayah yang dikuasai Hamas di Genting Gaza.

Bahkan di Knesset (Parlimen Israel), Barak mengatakan jika perlu operasi di Gaza itu akan diperluas.

"Jika serangan roket... yang ditujukan kepada rakyat awam Israel tak dihentikan segera, Israel akan menggunakan semua sumbernya dan semua alat senjata yang dimilikinya digunakan untuk memaksa musuh menghentikan tindakan tidak sah ini," kata Barak sebagaimana dipetik harian tempatan, Ha'etz.

Menteri Pertahanan Israel itu menyampaikan tekadnya pada hari ketiga serangan udara besar-besaran Israel terhadap rakyat Palestin di Genting Gaza.

Masyarakat antarabangsa yang berdemonstrasi di seluruh negara jelas mendesak para pemimpin dunia segera mengambil langkah-langkah untuk menghentikan tindakan barbarian tentera Israel terhadap rakyat Palestin.

Jika para pemimpin dunia tidak mampu menghukum pihak-pihak Israel yang berlaku biadab dan zalim terhadap rakyat awam di Genting Gaza, sebaik-baiknya mereka jangan lagi bercakap tentang perlunya penghormatan terhadap hak asasi manusia.

Dalam beberapa hari terakhir ini, tentera Israel terus melakukan serangan ke Gaza dengan alasan utama membedil kedudukan pasukan pejuang Hamas, salah satu kelompok penting Palestin.

Akibat serangan yang dilakukan sejak Sabtu lalu dengan menggunakan pesawat pengebom F-16 dan kereta kebal, ratusan penduduk yang sebahagian besar orang awam Palestin terbunuh dan cedera.

Apa pun alasannya, serangan Israel tidak boleh diampunkan. Ini adalah bukti yang nyata bahawa Israel adalah teroris yang brutal dan ganas.

Kebijakan Israel yang terus menerus bertindak ganas ke atas rakyat Palestin merupakan salah satu penyebab berkembangnya terorisme antarabangsa.

Dunia tidak harus berhenti hanya pada kecaman. Dunia harus memboikot Israel agar segera menghentikan penjajahan terhadap Palestin.

Sudah terlalu lama kekejaman dan brutalisme Israel tidak diambil tindakan tegas oleh Pertubuhan Bangsa-bangsa bersatu (PBB). Jadi tidak hairan kenapa Pergerakan Hamas yang menguasai Genting Gaza, kecewa terhadap masyarakat antarabangsa yang tidak mampu menghentikan serangan brutal tentera Israel.

"Israel sedang melakukan holocaust di mana seluruh dunia sedang menyaksikannya tetapi tidak menghentikan tindakan itu," kata jurucakap Hamas, Fauzi Barhum yang dipetik AFP di Kota Gaza kelmarin.

Holocaust merujuk pada pembunuhan oleh tentera Nazi Jerman pimpinan Adolf Hitler terhadap warga Yahudi dalam Perang Dunia Kedua. Pembunuhan itu meragut nyawa enam juta orang berketurunan Yahudi.

Sumber-sumber dari pasukan perubatan Palestin menyebut, operasi tentera rejim Zionis itu sudah mengorbankan kira-kira 320 orang dan mencederakan 1,400 lainnya.

Dunia memang mengecam dan meminta Israel segera menghentikan operasi ketenteraan di wilayah Gaza yang berpenduduk sekitar 1.5 juta orang itu.

Kini, persoalan pokok ialah bagaimana untuk mencipta kembali gencatan senjata di antara Hamas dan Israel. Mesir selama ini telah menaja gagasan itu dan berhasil selama enam bulan terakhir. Pintu rundingan damai mungkin tertutup untuk tempoh tertentu akibat perkembangan di Asia Barat ini.

Setiausaha Agung PBB Ban Ki-moon juga mengeluarkan kutukan. Namun, Majlis Keselamatan hanya mengeluarkan pernyataan tidak tegas yang menuntut Israel segera menghentikan operasi militer dan semua pihak mengakhiri kegiatan ketenteraan. Seperti biasa, Israel tidak peduli terhadap suara dunia. Menteri Pertahanan Ehud Barak mengumumkan perang habis-habisan terhadap Hamas. Ia menetapkan perbatasan dengan Gaza sebagai zon tentera tertutup.

"Kami tidak menyerang orang awam Gaza, tapi kami sedang berperang habis-habisan melawan Hamas dan anggotanya," kata Barak.

Cabaran Barak nampaknya disambut oleh Hamas. Selepas tiga hari Gaza, dibedil dengan bom oleh pasukan kereta kebal dan jet-jet tempur Israel, sebanyak 5,000 anggota pasukan elit Hamas dikumpulkan dari tempat-tempat persembunyian untuk melawan dan membalas balik serangan Israel.

Pemimpin Hamas, Ismail Haniye memerintahkan serangan balik ke atas wilayah yang diduduki Israel. "Jika perlu dengan serangan bunuh diri terhadap pasukan dan semua kepentingan Israel serta sekutunya di seluruh dunia," tegas Ismail.

Beberapa pejuang daripada pasukan elit Hamas sudah melakukan pembalasan dengan menyerang beberapa bandar di Israel. Pejuang-pejuang Palestin itu telah melepaskan 20 roket ke wilayah Israel sepanjang Isnin lalu. Dua di antaranya meledak kawasan Ashdod, sebuah kota pelabuhan yang hanya 25 km dari Tel Aviv.

Jangkauan terbaru roket Hamas itu boleh membuatkan Israel kecut perut kerana kemampuannya dua kali ganda daripada sasaran roket Hamas pada Ahad lalu yang jatuh di Ashkelon dan membunuh seorang rakyat Israel. Roket jenis Katyushas yang dilancar pejuang Palestin itu mengorbankan seorang tentera Israel di Ashdod. Dengan demikian, sudah dua warga Israel terbunuh sejak mereka mengadakan serangan udara di seluruh Gaza sejak 27 Disember lalu.

Untuk rekod, sepanjang 2008 sudah enam rakyat Israel terbunuh akibat serangan roket-roket Hamas. Bagaimanapun jumlah ini sangat tidak ketara jika dibandingkan dengan jumlah penduduk Gaza yang terkorban akibat serangan bom Israel yang jumlahnya sudah melebihi 320 nyawa.

Masih kuatnya penentangan Hamas itu membuatkan Israel semakin geram. Pada serangan gelombang ketiga Isnin lalu, giliran kampus terbesar, Universiti Islam Gaza menjadi sasaran. Hanya kerana banyak pemimpin Hamas merupakan bekas penuntut universiti itu, jet-jet tempur Israel mengebom habis-habisan gedung lima tingkat Universiti Islam itu. Makmal kampus yang didakwa Israel sebagai sumber dukungan bagi kelompok militan Hamas itu hancur lebur.

Selain itu, beberapa pusat kekuatan Hamas lainnya menjadi sasaran serangan udara yang berlangsung sebelum matahari terbit. Rumah Perdana Menteri Ismail Haniye, Pejabat Menteri Dalam Negeri dan terowong-terowong yang digunakan oleh rakyat Palestin untuk membawa barang keperluan dari Mesir juga dimusnahkan oleh bom-bom pesawat F-16 Israel.

Kerakusan serangan dari udara juga diikuti pergerakan barisan kenderaan berat tentera Israel di sempadan Gaza. Jumlah pasukan di wilayah perbatasan itu ditambah dua kali ganda. Para ahli ketenteraan meramalkan Israel menunggu jumlah anggota pasukan mencapai 10,000 orang sebelum penaklukan darat dilancarkan.

Apa yang dibimbangkan, serangan darat itu akan memakan korban lebih banyak dan semakin sulit untuk dihentikan.

[Baca]

Berhijrah demi akidah

KEMUNCULAN bulan Muharam pada tahun ini bermakna umat Islam telah memasuki tahun baru Hijrah 1430. Sejarah mencatatkan bahawa peristiwa hijrah ini amat besar ertinya bagi perjuangan Rasulullah khususnya, dan umumnya kepada seluruh umat Islam. Peristiwa ini juga bertujuan merubah strategi perjuangan Nabi SAW. dalam menegakkan syiar Islam.

Di bawah panji-panji Islam kaum Muhajirin dan Ansar membangun persaudaraan sejati, membangun masyarakat Madani di bawah pimpinan Rasulullah

Hijrah merupakan perintah ilahiah. Dan tahun Islam mengingatkan kaum Muslim bahawa pada setiap tahun bukan sahaja terhadap kemenangan, tetapi banyaknya pengorbanan yang telah dilakukan dan bersedia untuk melakukan pengorbanan yang sama seperti yang dilakukan oleh kaum Muhajirin dan Ansar itu. Iman, hijrah dan jihad adalah trilogi perjalanan hidup Rasulullah dan para sahabat.

Trilogi tersebut diabadikan dalam al- Quran pada surah al-Baqarah ayat 218: Sesungguhnya orang-orang yang beriman, orang-orang yang berhijrah dan berjihad di jalan Allah, mereka itu mengharapkan rahmat Allah, dan Allah Maha Pengampun lagi Maha Penyayang

Dalam meneruskan perjuangan Islam ini, tiada bekalan yang paling utama selain daripada akidah itu sendiri. Hijrah sebenarnya menggambarkan perjuangan untuk menyelamatkan akidah. Kita hijrah maknawi daripada perbuatan syirik kepada tauhid, dari kufur kepada iman, dari melakukan maksiat kepada taat, dari riak kepada ikhlas, dari takbur kepada tawaduk, dari malas kepada rajin dari khianat kepada amanah, dari dusta kepada jujur, dari perpecahan dan permusuhan kepada perpaduan dan berkasih sayang.

Perjuangan menegakkan akidah umat Islam di negara ini harus dihadapi dengan perjuangan dan keyakinan bahawa Allah swt sentiasa bersama dengan kita. Ini bukan bererti Allah bertempat, berjihad (berpihak) sebagaimana fahaman kumpulan bidaah. Al-Quran sendiri menjelaskan bahawa ketika saat hijrah Rasulullah ia adalah satu kemenangan walaupun ketika itu pada pandangan kita kemenangan itu belum dicapai.

Kalau kamu tidak menolong (Nabi Muhammad) maka sesungguhnya Allah telah pun menolongnya, iaitu ketika kaum kafir (di Mekah) mengeluarkannya (dari negerinya Mekah) sedang ia salah seorang daripada dua (sahabat) semasa mereka berlindung di dalam gua, ketika ia berkata kepada sahabatnya. Janganlah engkau berdukacita, sesungguhnya Allah bersama kita.

Maka Allah menurunkan semangat tenang tenteram kepada (Nabi Muhammad) dan menguatkan dengan bantuan tentera (malaikat) yang kamu tidak melihatnya. Dan Allah menjadikan seruan (syirik) orang-orang kafir terkebawah (kalah dengan sehina-hinanya) dan kalimah Allah (Islam) ialah yang tertinggi (selama-lamanya), kerana Allah Maha Kuasa, lagi Maha Bijaksana. (Surah al- Taubah ayat 40).

Keteguhan akidah atau agama seseorang itu diukur ketika ditimpa musibah bukan saat kemenangan atau kejayaan. Semua akan memeluk satu akidah apabila melihat kejayaan, namun belum tentu demikian apabila mengalami penderitaan.

Akidah atau tauhid adalah sesuatu yang paling berharga kepada umat Islam. Para Nabi saw. diutus untuk membawa manusia kepada akidah yang sebenar iaitu tauhid mutlak.(kesaan Alah). ketuhanan yang esa dan satu inilah Tuhan yang perlu disembah, Yang terkaya dan tidak berhajat kepada suatu kerana suatu yang lain itu semuanya berhajat dan memerlukan-Nya.

Pastinya benih tanaman akidah yang suci dan bersih ini dapat melahirkan bunga-bunga perpaduan dan kasih sayang, keikhlasan dan ketakwaan serta pengorbanan.

Dalam Islam, akidah yang berunsur ketakwaan inilah yang akan melahirkan amalan yang benar-benar ikhlas, di mana amalan-amalan seseorang tidak akan diterima Allah kecuali amalan-amalan yang dilakukan oleh orang yang tidak menyekutukan atau menyerupakan Tuhannya dengan sesuatu yang lain. Dalam hal ini Allah berfirman yang bermaksud: Tidak ada seumpama-Nya suatu pun. (As-Shuraa ayat 11).

Dari segi realiti pula, apa yang berlaku di negara kita terdapat gerakan-gerakan politik dan ideologi tertentu yang telah mengutamakan kepentingan politik dan peribadi daripada agama Islam itu sendiri sehingga lahir fatwa-fatwa karut yang boleh memesongkan amalan mereka atas alasan tuntutan sunah, agama dan sebagainya.

Akibatnya, kita dapat melihat begitu banyak sekali penyelewengan fikiran dan fahaman baik besar dan kecil tanpa disedari oleh pengikut awam. Semua ini berpunca daripada amalan mentaati semua fatwa yang dikeluarkan oleh pemimpin tertentu dan setengahnya adalah daripada kalangan pemimpin tertinggi agama yang mempunyai kepentingan diri dan politik.

Adalah tidak wajar kepada mana-mana golongan, misalnya mencampuri urusan Allah berhubung dengan perkara- perkara yang hanya diketahui oleh Allah seperti iman dan kufur, syurga dan neraka atau masa depan seseorang itu masuk syurga atau neraka, kerana ia juga dikategorikan sebagai penyelewengan akidah dalam mencapai sesuatu tujuan. Dalam Islam memfatwa dengan menafikan akidah sesama Islam secara rambang dan mudah adalah terkeluar daripada sunah Rasulullah.

Islam amat ketat untuk menentukan seseorang itu terkeluar daripada akidah atau murtad, kecuali setelah dia terang- terangan menunjukkan pengkhianatannya terhadap akidah Islam. Itu pun setelah dinilai dengan saksama oleh orang yang ahli dalam bidang tersebut.

Demikian juga tuduhan zalim dan terkeluar akidah kerana menolak hukum hudud. Kerajaan sebenarnya tidak pernah menolak hukum hudud.

Kita menyokong niat baik pihak mana sekalipun untuk melaksanakan hukum hudud tetapi ia perlu mengambil kira hal- hal lain yang menuju ke arah keislaman, tidak hanya menggunakan undang-undang yang dikatakan Islam sahaja.

Keadilan

Untuk mencapai keadilan yang di harapkan bukanlah sesuatu yang mudah kerana ia perlu kepada pelaksanaan yang betul. Prosedur, keterangan-keterangan serta penyiasatan semuanya mesti betul dan tidak mengandungi sebarang syubhat. Justeru inilah pemerintah melihat dalam kontek yang lebih jauh dan berhati-hati untuk melaksanakan hukum sepenuhnya termasuk hudud dan sebagainya kerana melihatkan banyak percubaan pemerintah Islam lain di negara luar sebelum ini semuanya menempuh kegagalan dan menghinakan lagi hukum Allah itu sendiri, bukan kerana menolak hukum tersebut, tetapi untuk mempastikan ia berada dalam satu keadaan yang semua akan menolong mencapai keadilan dan kemegahan Islam itu sendiri.

Inilah sebabnya ulama telah mengariskan suatu kaedah yang jelas sebagai dasar ikutan sesiapa yang berhasrat melaksanakan hukum tersebut, untuk mengelak dari berlaku kezaliman dalam suatu perundangan yang dilaksanakan. Kata mereka: Hukuman hudud akan digugurkan jika terdapat sebarang syubhat ini berpandukan hadis Rasulullah saw. yang mengarahkan supaya pemerintah jangan melaksanakan hukum hudud kiranya masih terdapat sebarang subhat atau kesamaran.

Tetapi berlainan dengan hukum takzir yang diserahkan kepada pilihan dan budi bicara pemerintah itu sendiri, sekalipun tindakan hukum takzir itu menyebabkan pembunuhan dan sebagainya. Kerana ia telah diberikan kepada kuasa pemerintah itu sepenuhnya.

Ia harus dilaksanakan dan tidak perlu digugurkan dengan syubhat seperti hudud tadi. Ini kerana hudud adalah merupakan hukum yang telah ditentu dan ditetap Allah tetapi cara dan masa pelaksanaannya terpulang kepada budi bicara pemerintah.

Jadi hendaklah dipastikan perbezaan antara siapa yang menolak hudud, dan siapa yang menangguhkannya kerana sebab tertentu yang dibenarkan agama.

Tegasnya undang-undang yang didasarkan kepada kepentingan atau maslahah yang kebelakangan, tetapi bercanggah dengan kepentingan dan maslahah yang lebih utama bukanlah undang-undang yang Islamik kerana tidak dapat mencapai matlamat yang dikehendaki oleh syariat Islam.

Demikian juga pusat pemulihan akidah yang dikawal selia oleh Jabatan Kemajuan Islam Malaysia (Jakim) perlu memainkan peranan yang lebih aktif khususnya dalam memulihkan akidah orang yang telah murtad atau mereka yang terpengaruh dengan ajaran sesat. Ini bertujuan bagi memastikan mereka benar-benar bertaubat dan kembali ke jalan benar dan diredai Allah.

Sempena tahun baru Hijrah 1430 ini, kita harus berusaha melawan hawa nafsu yang cenderung mengajak manusia ke arah melakukan perkara-perkara kejahatan dan penyeleweng daripada lunas-lunas syariat. Hijrah daripada sifat jahil kepada sifat kecerdikan dan kepandaian dari sikap jumud tertutup kepada sikap bertoleransi dan berlapang dada. Ini semua merupakan maksud dan tuntutan hijrah dalam Islam.

Penulis ialah Pengurus Penyelidikan Yayasan Dakwah Islamiah Malaysia (YADIM)

[Baca]

Ilmu memelihara agama

DI Britain, 25 Disember adalah hari Krismas sementara 26 Disember juga hari cuti yang mana kebanyakan pasar raya-pasar raya membuat jualan murah yang dianggap luar biasa. Seperti mana manusia sedunia tahu, apabila Krismas menjelang, wajah Santa Claus yang berbaju merah dan berambut putih panjang muncul di mana- mana.

Filem dan berbagai rancangan media akan mempromosikan Santa Claus dan kehadirannya pada hari Krismas. Walaupun sebahagian rancangan TV di sini mempersendakan Santa Claus. Bahkan mereka juga sering mempersendakan Jesus yang mereka anggap sebagai anak Tuhan dengan berbagai lawak jenaka yang amat tidak wajar untuk dikenakan kepada tokoh biasa, apatah lagi yang insan yang mereka anggap tuhan.

Namun, bagitulah jadinya nilai agama pada mereka. Santa Claus sebenarnya satu watak yang tidak pernah wujud dalam nas-nas agama Kristian sama ada yang telah diubah, apatah lagi yang asal. Bible sama sekali tidak pernah menyebut tentang kemunculan ‘watak Santa Claus’.

Ia hakikatnya adalah benar-benar khurafat dan bidaah yang telah palitkan kepada agama mereka sehingga ia akhirnya muncul menjadi perlambangan agama yang diterima umum dan sukar untuk dikikis lagi. Ia lebih teruk dari kepercayaan sesetengah masyarakat kita yang menyalakan lampu pada malam tujuh likur atau kepercayaan bahawa pada bulan Muharam digalakkan membuat bubur bagi mencontohi Nabi Noh a.s. Cerita Santa Claus lebih menonjol daripada faktor sebenar orang-orang Kristian menyambut Krismas.

Maka tidak hairanlah pada kita mengapakah Nabi SAW sering mengingatkan agar jangan mengada-adakan perkara yang baru atau bidaah yang dipalitkan menjadi agama. Tempelan baru yang dibuat atas nama agama jika dibiarkan akan menjadi kepercayaan yang akan mengambil tempat agama yang sebenar. Sabda Nabi SAW: Sesungguhnya sebaik-baik bicara adalah Kitab Allah, sebaik-baik petunjuk adalah petunjuk Muhammad, seburuk-buruk perkara adalah yang diada-adakan dan setiap bidaah itu sesat (Riwayat Muslim).

Al-Imam al-Syatibi (meninggal 911H) ketika mentakrifkan maksud bidaah menyebut: Jalan yang direka di dalam agama, yang menyerupai syariah, tujuan mengamalkannya untuk berlebihan dalam mengabdikan diri kepada Allah SWT. (al-Syatibi, al-I’tisam, m.s 27, Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabi).

Ertinya manusia boleh berinovasi dalam berbagai perkara, tetapi cara cuba mengadakan kepercayaan atau upacara agama yang tidak bersumberkan wahyu sehingga itu dianggap agama. Kata Dr Yusuf al-Qaradawi: “Sesungguhnya ruang melakukan rekaan dan membuat perkara baru bukannya dalam agama. Agama hanya berdasar apa yang diturunkan Allah.

Penyelewengan

 

Wajib kekal terpelihara lagi bersih dari mainan golongan yang sia-sia, penyelewengan golongan melampau, dakwaan golongan sesat dan tafsiran golongan yang jahil. Adapun ruang untuk melakukan rekaan sebenar adalah dalam urusan dunia.

Ia sangat luas dan banyak. Memerlukan keupayaan seni dan rekaan. Namun apabila kaum muslimin mundur, keadaan mereka buruk, urusan mereka rosak, pecah masyarakat mereka maka perkara tetap bagi mereka menjadi terbalik dan keadaan menjadi sebaliknya. Dalam urusan dunia mereka terhenti menjadi begitu jumud seperti batu atau lebih jumud dari itu. Mereka tidak memulakan rekaan, mengadakan dan menyingkap perkara baru.

Slogan mereka: Golongan awal tidak meninggalkan untuk yang kemudian sedikit pun. Adapun dalam agama mereka mengadakan rekaan, membuat bidaah dalam berbagai bentuk ibadah yang tidak diizinkan Allah” (al- Qaradawi, Al-‘Ibadah fi al-Islam, m.s 170, Beirut: Muassasah al-Risalah).

Istimewanya Islam dibandingkan ajaran lain, dalam Islam kita masih mempunyai sumber rujukan tertinggi iaitu al-Quran dan al-Sunnah untuk mengukur sejauh manakah pendapat golongan agamawan ataupun tokoh itu kukuh ataupun lemah.

Kita disuruh menghormati tokoh ilmuan, apatah lagi ilmuan Islam atau yang kita bahasakan sebagai ulama. Namun penghormatan kita kepada mereka tidaklah sama sekali bererti kita tidak boleh memberikan pandangan yang berbeza atas asas-asas ilmu atau penghujahan yang berteraskan fakta dan angka.

Umpamanya, ketokohan al-Imam al-Ghazali dihormati, namun kritikan tetap diberikan oleh para ulama terhadapnya. Kritikan bukanlah menunjukkan jasanya dilupakan. Antaranya, al-Hafiz al-Zahabi (meninggal 748H) yang menyebut: “Aku katakan: Al-Ghazali adalah imam yang besar, namun bukanlah menjadi syarat seorang alim itu untuk dia tidak melakukan kesilapan”. Lalu al-Imam al-Zahabi memberikan kritikan ilmiah terhadap Kitab Ihya Ulumuddin karangan al-Imam al-Ghazali, katanya: “Adapun kitab al-Ihya padanya ada sejumlah hadis yang batil. Sekiranya tidak ada padanya adab, cara dan zuhud yang diambil dari ahli falsafah dan golongan sufi yang menyeleweng, padanya ada kebaikan yang banyak. Kita memohon daripada Allah ilmu yang bermanfaat. Tahukah anda apa itu ilmu yang bermanfaat?

Ia apa yang dinyatakan al-Quran dan ditafsirkannya oleh Rasulullah secara perkataan dan perbuatan”. (Al-Zahabi, Siyar ‘Alam al-Nubala 19/339, Beirut: Muassasah al-Risalah, Beirut) Begitu juga ilmuan tafsir yang terkenal al-Imam Ibn Kathir (meninggal 774H) memberikan kritikan ilmiah terhadap karangan al-Imam al-Ghazali dalam Al-Bidayah wa Al-Nihayah: “Ketika berada di Damsyik dan Baitul Maqdis, al-Ghazali mengarang kitabnya Ihya ‘Ulumuddin, ia sebuah kitab yang ganjil. Ia mengandungi ilmu yang banyak berkaitan syarak, bercampur dengan kehalusan tasawuf dan amalan hati. Namun padanya banyak hadis yang gharib, munkar, dan palsu”. (Ibn Kathir, Al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah, 12/186, Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyyah).

Demikian ramai ilmuan lain dalam sejarah islam ini menerima berbagai kritikan dan perkara itu bukanlah ganjil. Saya sebutkan contoh ini bagi menggambarkan bahawa tidak pernah kemaksuman itu diberikan dalam Islam kepada sesiapa pun selain Allah dan rasul-Nya. Inilah jalan untuk menjamin agar ilmu sentiasa mengatasi tokoh atau institusi.

Dengan itu agama yang tulen akan terpelihara. Namun, dalam mengkritik dijaga adab dan bersikap adil. Bukanlah seperti sesetengah laman web kelompok agama atau politik agama yang mengharamkan orang lain mengkritik pimpinan mereka dan menjadikan maki-hamun itu halal bagi mereka dalam menghadapi golongan yang mereka tidak setujui.

DR. Mohd Asri ZainUl Abidin ialah

bekas mufti perlis dan sekarang pensyarah

pengajian islam, universiti sains Malaysia (usm) yang sedang sabatikal di Britain.

laman web: drmaza.com.

E-mel: moasriza@yahoo.com.

[Baca]

Tiada noktah dalam hijrah

SISTEM pendidikan lama seperti pengajian kitab dari kulit ke kulit masih diteruskan di MMPSD, Kuala Krai, Kelantan. - Gambar HAFIZ JOHARI

MESKIPUN hijrah dari Mekah ke Madinah tidak akan berlaku lagi tetapi hijrah ke arah yang lebih baik itu harus terus berlaku sepanjang zaman.

Hakikatnya, hijrah bukanlah asing dalam Islam dan ia adalah lumrah dalam kehidupan muslim, apatah lagi penghijrahan itu adalah ke arah yang lebih baik.

Bahkan, hijrah kerana menuntut ilmu, berakhlak mulia, mencari kebenaran, berdakwah dan bermacam-macam bentuk hijrah adalah tuntutan dan asas ajaran Islam itu sendiri.

Lantas, untuk terus maju dan mencapai kemuliaan, masyarakat Islam tidak boleh berpeluk tubuh dan hanya berserah kepada takdir.

Umat Islam terdahulu telah berjihad secara habis-habisan, sebab itulah Islam berada di tempat yang mulia dan sepatutnya.

Sempena sambutan Maal Hijrah yang diraikan hari ini, maka umat Islam perlu melihat hijrah dalam perspektif yang luas demi menuju kegemilangan di dunia dan di akhirat.

Lantaran itu, langkah perubahan berterusan Madrasah Muhammadiah Pondok Sungai Durian (MMPSD) di Kampung Sungai Durian, Kuala Krai, Kelantan sepanjang 50 tahun usia penubuhannya adalah contoh terbaik dalam mewarisi semangat juang Baginda Rasulullah SAW dan para sahabat demi menegakkan syiar Islam.

Sebut sekolah pondok pastinya yang terbayang pondok-pondok kayu yang usang dan serba kekurangan dari segi prasarana. Pun begitu, hijrah MMPSD mampu membuktikan pengajian pondok kini sudah melangkah ke fasa baru.

Setiausaha MMPSD, Ustaz Yahya Yaacob berkata, berlakunya pelbagai perubahan di situ adalah seiring dengan perkembangan dan kemampuan semasa, apa lagi perubahan itu adalah sebahagian daripada tuntutan agama. Malah bagi beliau, inilah makna sebenar hijrah yang harus dihayati dalam kehidupan ini.

"Jika pada awal penubuhannya dahulu, MMPSD hanya berada dalam satu kawasan yang agak terhad, iaitu dalam sebidang tanah seluas lima hingga enam ekar, kini bertambah 12 ekar hasil pembelian tanah daripada jiran sekitar pondok.

"Malahan jika dilihat dari aspek kemudahan infrastruktur, dari 1958 hingga akhir 70-an, MMPSD tidak mempunyai kemudahan jalan, penginapan, tempat belajar dan tempat ibadat yang selesa.

"Hari ini, MMPSD telah mempunyai kemudahan jalan, penginapan juga telah berubah dari pondok-pondok kecil yang asalnya dibina dengan kayu tetapi sekarang sebahagiannya telah diubah dengan binaan bangunan batu. Begitu juga dengan bilik-bilik darjah dan masjid yang turut diperbesarkan," katanya yang dihubungi, baru-baru ini.

Tambah Yahya, walaupun sekarang ini sistem pendidikan sudah diselaraskan dari aspek kurikulum dan sistem pendidikan, namun sistem lama seperti pengajian kitab dari kulit ke kulit masih diteruskan.

Pun begitu, pendekatannya telah diubah iaitu dengan memperkenalkan ujian atau peperiksaan agar pelajar memperoleh sijil bagi membolehkan mereka menyambung pengajian ke peringkat lebih tinggi.

"MMPSD melaksanakan dua sistem pembelajaran iaitu sistem pondok cara tradisional dan sistem persekolahan dengan mengikut sukatan Yayasan Islam Kelantan (YIK).

"Menerusi sukatan pelajaran YIK, pelajar akan mengikuti tujuh mata pelajaran dalam kelas dan pada masa sama MMPSD membuat sedikit tambahan dalam sukatan berkenaan untuk mengimbanginya dengan sukatan pondok.

Pelajar MMPSD juga akan menduduki tiga peperiksaan dalam setahun kerana pihak sekolah juga akan mengeluarkan sijil kepada pelajar yang berjaya dalam peperiksaan akhir sesi pengajian (Shahadah Thanawiah).

Pelajar tingkatan empat pula diwajibkan menduduki peperiksaan Sijil Menengah Agama yang dikelolakan YIK. Manakala Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM) akan diduduki secara persendirian.

"Alhamdulillah, pencapaian mereka dalam kedua-dua peperiksaan ini membanggakan," terang Yahya hingga kini terdapat 200 pelajar termasuk lelaki dan perempuan berbanding pada awal penubuhannya iaitu 15 orang.

Akui Yahya lagi, meskipun sejak dahulu terdapat sebahagian masyarakat yang memandang negatif terhadap peranan pengajian pondok, namun ada juga yang menerima dengan baik terutamanya dalam menghadapi fenomena 'langit terbuka'.

Malah melihat kepada jumlah kemasukan pelajar yang bertambah dari semasa ke semasa, membuktikan bahawa peranan dan fungsi sekolah pondok masih relevan dengan situasi pendidikan masa kini.

[Baca]

Kiai Muhammad Ali Qaribun pengasas awal pondok di Selangor

GAMBAR terkini Masjid Sultan Singapura yang diasaskan oleh Kiai Haji Ali Umar Qaribun.

Pendahuluan

TOKOH ulama Selangor yang dibicarakan pada kali ini merupakan ulama yang dikenali sebagai pelopor institusi pendidikan pondok di negeri Selangor, sebelum wujudnya institusi pendidikan moden yang wujud kini. Kertas kerja mengenai tokoh ulama ini dibentangkan oleh Ustaz Ahmad Shukri Ghazali pada Seminar Tokoh Ulama Selangor 2008 pada 22 November tersebut, dengan diberi judul, Kiai Muhammad Ali Qaribun: Pengasas Awal Pondok di Selangor.

Perkara-perkara yang dibicarakan dalam kertas kerja tersebut adalah menyentuh tentang latar belakang keluarga, pendidikan, perkhidmatan sebagai askar, pengasas Masjid Sultan Singapura, mendirikan masjid dan pondok di Sijangkang, kitab-kitab pengajian yang diajar di pondok, hubungan Kiai Muhammad Ali dengan ulama dan kerabat Diraja Brunei dan Selangor, karamah beliau dan kewafatan beliau.

Dilihat bahawa maklumat-maklumat berkaitan tokoh ulama yang dibicarakan tersebut wajar ditonjolkan keseluruhannya. Namun disebabkan kepadatan ruangan ini, maka hanya beberapa perkara sahaja yang disentuh, selebihnya akan dilanjutkan pada ruangan akan datang. Perkara-perkara yang dipetik untuk bahagian pertama ini yang diambil dari kertas kerja hasil kajian Ustaz Ahmad Shukri Ghazali (selepas ini disebut sebagai penulis) tersebut adalah mengenai latar belakang keluarga, perkhidmatan beliau sebagai askar, pendidikan dan sejarah beliau mendirikan masjid di Singapura dan Sijangkang.

Latar belakang keluarga

Nama beliau ialah Kiai Muhammad Ali bin Qaribun bin Suruyan Al-Mentarami, berasal dari Bantul, Mataram (Jogjakarta), Indonesia dan dilahirkan sekitar tahun 1858/1279H. Susur galur keturunan beliau bertemu dengan Sunan Ampel, iaitu salah seorang daripada sembilan Wali Songo yang terkenal di Tanah Jawa.

Beliau mempunyai sembilan adik-beradik, yang terdiri daripada lapan lelaki dan seorang perempuan, iaitu Kiai Abdul Rahman, Kiai Abdul Samad, Kiai Mustafa, Kiai Abbas (Abdullah Kahfi), Kiai Syafei, Kiai Tarmizi dan Mbah Ayu.

Ayah beliau, Kiai Qaribun bin Suriyan merupakan orang penting di Keraton Mataram sekitar tahun 1800an, Dikatakan bahawa ayah beliau adalah pengiring dan pemayung sultan semasa adat istiadat di Istana Keraton. Setelah Kiai Qaribun diangkat menjadi pengiring dan juru payung sultan, beliau mengahwini puteri Sultan Mataram.

Kisah Kiai Qaribun dilantik sebagai juru payung dan pengiring sultan bermula apabila kawasan Mataram khususnya Keraton sudah tidak selamat kerana sering diancam oleh perompak. Pada satu ketika perompak cuba menceroboh kawasan Keraton, lalu Kiyai Qaribun berkata: "Perompak ini seperti anjing", lantas ia bertukar menjadi anjing. Maka setelah kewafatan juru payung dan juru iring sultan, Kiai Qaribun dilantik menjawat tugas tersebut sehingga akhir hayat. Sehingga kini kebanyakan keluarga Qaribun menetap di daerah Bantul, Mataram (Jogjakarta).

Apabila Kiai Qaribun kembali ke rahmatullah, beliau dikebumikan di Bantul, Mataram (Jogjakarta) bersama-sama kerabatnya dan tertulis di batu nisannya dengan nama Kiai Koribun. Pernah terjadi ketika berlaku gempa bumi di Jogjakarta pada 2007, dikatakan makam Kiai Qaribun tidak mengalami sebarang kerosakan dan keretakan seolah-olah dipelihara dengan baik.

Semasa hidupnya, Kiai Qaribun menyarankan agar tiga orang anak lelakinya yang diketuai oleh Kiai Haji Muhammad Ali, Kiai Abbas dan Kiai Syafie menuju ke Tanah Melayu untuk menyebarkan dakwah Islam di sana.

Kiai Qaribun juga pernah membina sebuah masjid yang dinamakan Masjid Al-Qaribun. Masjid tersebut diperbuat daripada batang kelapa dan putih telur tanpa plaster dan kini masih dalam proses membaik pulih melalui sumbangan cucunya yang berada di Malaysia.

Berkhidmat sebagai askar

Semasa beliau berada di Johor sekitar tahun 1889, berkemungkinan sebelum mendirikan rumah tangga, beliau pernah berkhidmat sebagai askar hutan atau askar Inggeris menentang pemberontak selama hampir 18 tahun dan dibayar gaji sebanyak $12 setahun.

Semasa beliau mula-mula tiba di Tanah Melayu, iaitu di Johor, beliau tidak tahu berbahasa Melayu dan juga tidak tahu menulis rumi. Disebabkan sikapnya yang suka mengembara, beliau telah diambil oleh Inggeris untuk berkhidmat melawan pemberontak di Pahang. Pihak Inggeris sering berulang alik dari Johor, dan mereka akan bertukar askar dengan Indonesia dan Malaya.

Kadangkala askar Belanda akan mengambil askar Melayu untuk menentang penjajah Indonesia, begitu juga sebaliknya. Semasa berada di hutan, beliau dikatakan amat mahir berburu dan membuat jerat untuk menangkap harimau dan kera., dan menjadikan beliau semakin berani, banyak bergaul dan semakin mahir berbahasa Melayu.

Akibat merasa bosan hidup dalam hutan dan sering melarikan diri, maka akhirnya beliau melarikan diri dari menjadi askar. Setelah melarikan diri, seorang rakannya yang sama-sama berkhidmat sebagai askar bernama Pak Ramli telah memberikannya lima ekar tanah di Sijangkang untuk tinggal di sana.

Hanya satu ekar diwakafkan untuk dijadikan pondok dan kini dijadikan kawasan masjid, manakala empat ekar adalah untuk didiami keluarga Kiai Haji Muhammad Ali. Semasa berkhidmat dengan askar Inggeris, Pak Ramli adalah salah seorang yang berpengaruh dan dianugerahkan pingat pangkat Dato.

Pendidikan

Kiai Haji Muhammad Ali mendapat pendidikan awal di Tanah Jawa, Indonesia sekitar tahun 1868-1878. Tidak disebut tempat beliau mendapat pendidikan awal sebelum ke Mekah, namun beliau pernah menyebut beberapa buah pondok di Tanah Jawa yang masyhur iaitu Pesantren Termas di daerah Pacitan, Pesantren Lir boyo di Kediri, Pesantren Tebuireng di Jombang, Jawa Timur dan Pesantren Langitan di Tuban.

Ini kerana keempat-empat pondok tersebut sentiasa disebut semasa beliau mengajar murid-muridnya di Sijangkang. Namun perkara tersebut masih dalam kajian kerana penulis masih meragui apakah pesantren yang disebut itu merupakan tempat beliau menuntut ilmu atau mungkin tempat teman-teman sepengajian beliau yang telah berjaya membuka pondok.

Walau bagaimanapun, penulis beranggapan kesemua pondok yang disebutkan adalah tempat beliau menimba ilmu kerana pada 1889 tersebut, Kiai Haji Muhammad Ali telah pun berada di Tanah Melayu, sedangkan pesantren yang disebutkan wujud sekitar tahun 1906 atau 1910, kecuali Pesantren Termas di daerah Pacitan Indonesia dan Pesantren Langitan, Tuban yang dianggap antara pesantren tertua.

Pendidikan Kiai Haji Muhammad Ali masih kabur kerana ramai yang menyatakan beliau menuntut ilmu di Tanah Jawa kemudian ke Mekah selama puluhan tahun dengan menaiki kapal layar sekitar tahun 1880an. Rata-rata masyarakat menyebut beliau belajar di Tanah Jawa dan di Mekah selama puluhan tahun. Malah ada juga yang mendakwa beliau berada di Mekah selama 15 tahun sebagai guru di sana.

Pengasas Masjid Sultan Singapura

Menurut cucu beliau bernama Tuan Haji Sani, Kiai Haji Muhammad Ali ke Mekah sebanyak dua kali, kali pertama sebagai seorang penuntut, dan kali kedua sebagai tenaga pengajar di sana. Hal yang sama juga apabila beliau datang ke Tanah Melayu iaitu sebanyak dua kali. Kali pertama seorang diri dan kali kedua bersama adiknya.

Pada kali pertama pulang ke Tanah Jawa, beliau singgah di Singapura dan membangunkan sebuah masjid yang diperbuat daripada kayu bersama rakan-rakannya. Kini masjid tersebut dikenali sebagai Masjid Sultan Singapura. Sejarah pembinaan masjid kayu ini menjadikan Kiai Haji Muhammad Ali semakin masyhur dan dikenali di Mekah dan Tanah Jawa. Nama beliau disemadikan di batu asas Masjid Sultan Singapura sebagai "Pengasas Masjid Kiai Haji Ali Umar Qaribun Bantul Miri."

Setelah masjid lama daripada kayu dirobohkan, batu asas tersebut diletakkan berhampiran makam Sultan Hussain di ruangan bawah masjid dan akhirnya dibawa balik ke Bantul, Miri Mataram oleh kerabat beliau yang merupakan seorang kapten tentera Indonesia. Bahkan hubungan kekeluargaan Kiai Haji Muhammad Ali dengan masyarakat Jawa di Indonesia masih wujud hingga kini.

Oleh yang demikian, tidak hairan beliau sangat dihormati dan disegani oleh para ulama di Singapura pada waktu itu, kerana jasanya yang sangat besar.

Mendirikan masjid di Sijangkang

Menurut cucu Kiai Muhammad Ali lagi, nama Sijangkang diambil sempena sebatang sungai yang mengalir di bawah sepohon kayu yang melengkung seumpama orang yang sedang kangkang. Sungai tersebut merupakan laluan utama antara Pandamar dan Sijangkang.

Setelah beliau menabur jasa di Singapura dan menjadi orang penting di Johor, maka beliau lantas mengambil keputusan pulang ke Mekah. Setelah 15 tahun berada di Mekah, beliau sekali lagi datang ke Johor kemudian singgah di Kajang dan membuka masjid di sana.

Berdasarkan balasan sepucuk surat, Kiai Haji Muhammad Ali telah berada di Sijangkang pada 1335H/1917M dan tidak lama kemudian, beliau bersama masyarakat setempat membangunkan sebuah masjid yang dikenali sebagai Masjid Kiai Haji Muhammad Ali Umar Sijangkang.

Namun begitu, tapak masjid lama tersebut tidak dapat bertahan lama kerana telah roboh dan dijadikan kawasan perkuburan Islam di Sijangkang. Setelah itu, masjid baru telah dibina dan diberi nama Masjid Kiai Haji Muhammad Ali yang dirasmikan oleh Sultan Selangor iaitu Sultan Hisamuddin Syah pada 1921.

Setelah itu, diwujudkan cadangan untuk membina masjid baru dan mendapat tentangan daripada keluarga Kiai Haji Muhammad Ali yang memohon agar masjid tersebut dikekalkan sebagai satu masjid warisan sejarah Selangor. Walau bagaimanapun tentangan tersebut gagal, akhirnya Masjid Kiai Haji Muhammad Ali dirobohkan termasuk tiang seri dan beberapa khazanah lain dimusnahkan seperti jam antik dan lain-lain.

Setelah masjid baru dibina, nama pengasas masjid tersebut tidak diabadikan dan ditukar kepada Masjid Al-Ihsaniyah, bukan Masjid Kiai Ali. Berkemungkinan nama Al-Ihsaniyah diambil sempena nama anak beliau Kiai Ihsan bin Kiai Haji Muhammad Ali.

Penutup

Untuk selanjutnya pada ruangan akan datang membicarakan mengenai sejarah pendirian pondok yang didirikan oleh Kiai Muhammad Ali di Sijangkang berserta kitab-kitab pengajian yang diajar. Selain itu turut disentuh mengenai hubungan beliau dengan ulama-ulama terkenal yang lain dan hubungan dengan kerabat Diraja Brunei di Selangor. Keseluruhan perkara-perkara yang dibicarakan tersebut juga adalah hasil kajian penulis, yang juga masih mempunyai hubungan kekeluargaan sebagai datuk saudara kepada penulis.

[Baca]

Konvokesyen anak-anak DIC

DIDIKLAH anak-anak dalam tiga perkara: Mencintai Nabimu, mencintai keluarga dan tilawah al-Quran, sebab orang yang memelihara al-Quran itu berada dalam lindungan singgahsana Allah bersama para Nabi-Nya dan orang-orang yang suci, pada hari tidak ada perlindungan selain daripada perlindungan-Nya." (riwayat At-Tabrani)

Hadis di atas jelas kepada kita terutamanya ibu bapa Muslim kaedah dalam mendidik anak yang digariskan Islam. Yang pastinya, ia bukan sahaja memberi jaminan keselamatan dan kebahagiaan duniawi semata-mata tetapi mencakupi ukhrawi yang kekal abadi.

Mungkin ramai ibu bapa yang berkerut dahi memikirkan bagaimana tiga perkara ini mampu mendepani isu-isu serius yang melanda masyarakat kita hari ini. Oleh kerana itulah, hadis di atas tidak sahaja perlu difahami maksud yang tersurat tetapi apa yang tersirat di sebaliknya.

Menyedari pendidikan atau menuntut ilmu adalah sesuatu yang dituntut agama Islam, apa lagi dengan ilmu dan amal itu ia bakal menjadi aset di akhirat kelak.

Sebagaimana sabda Rasulullah SAW yang bermaksud: Apabila manusia mati maka terputuslah amalannya kecuali daripada tiga perkara: Sedekah jariah, ilmu bermanfaat dan anak soleh yang mendoakannya. (riwayat Muslim)

Kewujudan pusat-pusat asuhan dan sekolah prasekolah kini bagaikan cendawan tumbuh selepas hujan. Yang pastinya, penubuhan institusi pendidikan awal ini bergerak demi menjana modal insan yang berguna kepada agama, keluarga, bangsa dan negara.

Di samping itu, ia juga menyediakan platform kukuh kepada kanak-kanak ini agar tidak terkejut sama ada dalam menguasai ilmu komunikasi, pergaulan dan pendedahan kepada ilmu konvensional seperti penguasaan komputer, bahasa dan sebagainya.

Menjelang 2009 yang tinggal beberapa hari lagi pastinya membawa semangat baru kepada wanita kelahiran Cik Siti Wan Kembang iaitu, Robiyah Yusoh, Pengarah Urusan Pusat Perkembangan Minda Kanak-kanak Darul Iqra Centre Sdn. Bhd. (DIC).

Kalau sebelum ini, DIC sekadar beroperasi di Persiaran Menanti Bandar Sri Damansara, Kuala Lumpur, kini ia telah melebarkan cawangannya di beberapa lokasi strategik. Yang terbaru, terletak di Seksyen 7, Bandar Baru Bangi, Selangor.

"Sekarang ini DIC sedang giat mengadakan sesi temuduga kepada mereka yang berkelayakan khususnya kepada para siswazah bidang Pengajian Islam, Pendidikan Awal Kanak-kanak serta Psikologi Kanak-Kanak dan Keluarga untuk menjadi warga DIC yang semakin berkembang, lebih-lebih lagi menjelang 2009.

"Malah kakitangan yang diterima juga akan dihantar berkursus berkaitan teori dan praktikal bagi memantapkan ilmu dan kemahiran diri.

Ini kerana di DIC, kami bukan sahaja mementingkan pembelajaran semata-mata tetapi segala aspek yang berkaitan pembinaan modal insan adalah menjadi keuntamaan kami.

"Oleh itu, empat aspek yang diterapkan dan diamalkan di DIC iaitu; fizikal, bahasa, kemahiran kognitif dan sosial emosi," ujar Robiyah selepas Majlis Konvokesyen dan Kecemerlangan DIC kali yang keempat yang berlangsung di Kelab Golf Sri Damansara, baru-baru ini.

Setakat ini kata Robiyah, DIC menyediakan lima kemudahan atau pakej iaitu tadika, taska, transit , kelas fardu ain dan tuisyen dengan bayaran yang berpatutan. Kanak-kanak daripada seawal usia empat tahun akan diberikan penekanan kepada teknik 3M (membaca, menulis dan mengira) sebelum mereka melangkah ke alam persekolahan.

"Bermula tahun depan juga kami akan menyediakan kelas komputer sebagai satu cara menyahut seruan kerajaan agar kanak-kanak celik teknologi maklumat (IT).

"Malah kami sentiasa memastikan perlaksanaan kajian berterusan berkaitan bidang pendidikan awal kanak-kanak menjadi teras keutamaan," ujarnya yang turut menerima sumbangan berjumlah RM3,000 daripada Ahli Dewan Undangan Negeri (ADUN) Paya Jaras merangkap Ketua Bahagian UMNO Subang, Datuk Ir. Muhammad Bushro Mat Johor yang telah merasmikan majlis pagi itu. Turut hadir Datuk Said Mulok.

Kata Robiyah lagi, dalam usaha mengembagkan lagi sayap DIC, pada tahun depan, pihaknya akan memperkenalkan projek rakan kongsi sejajar dengan matlamat untuk melahirkan lebih ramai usahawan bumiputera.

"Mereka yang berminat dalam pendidikan awal kanak-kanak dan pada masa sama mahu berdikari dalam membina ekonomi diri, bolehlah menghubungi kami di talian 03-6277 5891 atau 017-2499150.

Para hadirin pada majlis konvokesyen itu telah dihiburkan dengan aneka persembahan daripada kanak-kanak DIC.

[Baca]

Islam larang rosakkan bumi

ALLAH menciptakan langit dan bumi serta segala isinya untuk manfaat umat manusia. Bagaimanapun, tidak ramai yang menghargai nikmat alam sekitar itu. Hal ini menyebabkan ada di kalangan manusia memandang enteng nikmat tersebut sehinggakan bertindak menggondolkan bukit-bukau sewenang-wenangnya.

Sehubungan itu, Allah memberi peringatan melalui firman-Nya yang bermaksud: Telah kelihatan kerosakan di darat dan di laut disebabkan perbuatan tangan manusia, kerana Allah hendak merasakan mereka sebahagian daripada balasan perbuatan buruk yang mereka telah lakukan supaya mereka kembali insaf. (al-Rum: 41)

Berkenaan tanggungjawab manusia memelihara alam sekitar, Rasulullah SAW bersabda yang bermaksud: Dunia ini hijau dan cantik dan Tuhan telah melantik kamu sebagai pengurusnya. Dia melihat apa yang kamu lakukan. (riwayat Muslim).

Wartawan MOHD. RADZI MOHD. ZIN menemu bual Timbalan Dekan Fakulti Pengajian Quran dan Sunnah, Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia, Nidzamuddin Zakaria bagi mengupas isu ini.

Mega: Apakah konsep penjagaan alam sekitar dalam Islam?

Nidzamuddin: Persatuan Bangsa-Bangsa Bersatu 1972 menjelaskan bahawa alam sekitar adalah: “Suatu aset atau simpanan sumber-sumber alam sama ada berbentuk material dalam kelompok masyarakat atau populasi tertentu, pada waktu dan tempat yang tertentu bagi menyempurnakan dan memenuhi keperluan manusia dari masa ke semasa”. (Rujuk: Muhammad Sa’id dan Rasyid Ahmad. 1986. Al-Bi’ah wa musykilatiha. Kuwait: Maktabah al-Falah.Hal. 25).

Ibnu Abd. Rabbihi pula menyatakan takrif alam sekitar ini di dalam kitabnya al-Jumanah dengan penjelasannya bahawa: “Alam sekitar ialah yang merujuk kepada kehidupan ciptaan Ilahi dan kebudayaan yang wujud di mana manusia dapat menjalani kehidupan di dalamnya”. (Rujuk: Muhammad Abd al-Qadir Al-Fiqqiyy. 1993. Al-Bi’ah Musykiluha wa Qadayaha. Kaherah: Maktabah Ibn Sina. Hal. 9.)

Al-Quran dan sunah memberikan penekanan yang serius mengenai penjagaan alam sekitar di mana kedua-dua sumber perundangan ini menyeru manusia untuk mengekalkan pemeliharaannya sebagai satu kurniaan atau nikmat Tuhan yang agung. Ia melarang pencemaran di samping menggesa mereka untuk memanfaatkan khazanah alam di mana usaha murni ini di sanjung mulia agama Islam bahkan dianggap sebagai ibadat yang agung di sisi Tuhan. Alam sekitar tidak terhad kepada aspek estetika dan kebersihan fizikal semata-mata. Hakikatnya keseimbangan alam sekitar memberi kesan ketara kepada keharmonian dan kesejahteraan hidup selari dengan kemajuan negara serta kemakmuran bumi. Tanpa rimbunan pokok, maka tadahan hujan untuk bekalan air akan mengurang. Tanpa hutan maka keupayaan menyerap gas karbon dioksida di atmosfera akan berkurangan. Tanpa udara yang bebas bahan cemar, maka kesihatan awam terancam.

Ajaran agama menjelaskan peranan alam sekitar sebagai salah satu unsur terpenting aspek ketuhanan dalam konteks kosmologi. Ajaran Islam pula menjelaskan kedudukan alam sekitar yang kudus dan tertib. Itulah rasionalnya alam sekitar dikemukakan sebagai salah satu teras Islam Hadhari.

Pelestarian dan kepentingan alam sekitar disebutkan secara tersurat dan tersirat dalam banyak ayat al-Quran dan hadis. Allah SWT berfirman yang bermaksud: ...(iaitu) Orang yang mengingati Allah sambil berdiri atau duduk atau dalam keadaan berbaring dan mereka memikirkan mengenai penciptaan langit dan bumi (seraya berkata): “Ya Tuhan kami, tiadalah Engkau menciptakan ini dengan sia-sia. Maha Suci Engkau, peliharalah kami daripada seksa neraka. (ali-Imran: 191).

Ayat ini menunjukkan bahawa alam sekitar fizikal dan seluruh cakerawala adalah tanda kebesaran Allah Yang Maha Pencipta. Orang beriman sentiasa berusaha menjadikan alam sekitar terpelihara dan bersih, bukan saja dalam keadaan aman, malah ketika peperangan.

Ajaran Islam mengajar umatnya supaya melestarikan alam sekitar kerana di sebalik kehijauan hutan dan kebiruan langit, tertera ayatullah yang memperlihatkan sifat Allah Yang Maha Kuasa dan Maha Pencipta.

Kejadian tanah runtuh di Bukit Antarabangsa adalah satu lagi contoh keengganan manusia mematuhi perintah Allah sebagaimana dalam surah ar-Rum: 41. Bagaimana membetulkan keadaan ini?

Nidzamuddin: Kalau kita meneliti sumber-sumber syarak dan usul-usulnya, pasti kita akan melihat asas-asas dan dasar-dasar yang murni yang digagaskan oleh Islam. Ia bagi memandu dan memimpin suatu etika dan akhlak yang terpuji bagi setiap individu muslim berperanan dan bermuamalah secara positif dengan alam sekitar ciptaan Ilahi ini agar warisan tersebut tidak pupus atau rosak di tangan manusia itu sendiri.

Akhirnya, ketiadaan sikap menyayangi dan memelihara alam sekitar ini boleh membawa kepada kemusnahan, kerosakan dan bencana yang menimpa manusia itu sendiri.

Allah menegaskan hal ini melalui firman-Nya yang bermaksud: Telah timbul berbagai kerosakan dan bala bencana di darat dan di laut dengan sebab apa yang telah dilakukan oleh tangan manusia; (timbulnya yang demikian) kerana Allah hendak merasakan mereka sebahagian dari balasan perbuatan-perbuatan buruk yang mereka telah lakukan, supaya mereka kembali (insaf dan bertaubat). (al-Rum: 41).

Tindakan paling drastik yang perlu dilakukan umat Islam adalah kembali kepada Islam itu sendiri, tinggalkan budaya atau gaya hidup yang jauh daripada Allah dan syariat-Nya. Barangkali musibah seumpama ini adalah peringatan untuk kita agar jangan lalai dan leka terhadap peranan kita selaku hamba dan khalifah-Nya di muka bumi ini.

Islam adalah agama yang mengikat hubungan kita dengan Pencipta dan menjalin hubungan manusia sesama manusia.

Islam juga menyusun peradaban dan etika manusia dengan makhluk sekitarnya meliputi alam dan ciptaan Tuhan yang berada di atasnya bersesuaian dengan agenda utama manusia di muka bumi ini selaku khalifah Tuhan yang mentadbir dan mengurus dunia ini dengan saksama dan penuh bijaksana demi kemaslahatan manusia dan keharmonian alam sekitarnya.

Bukit-bukau dan gunung-ganang dijadikan Allah sebagai pasak bumi (al-Anbiya’: 31). Apakah saranan Islam tentang pembangunan seimbang (sustainable development)?

Nidzamuddin: Kita perhatikan dahulu ayat al-Quran itu tadi. Allah menegaskan: Dan Kami telah menjadikan di bumi gunung-ganang yang menetapnya, supaya bumi itu tidak menggegar mereka dan Kami jadikan padanya celah-celah sebagai jalan-jalan lalu-lalang, supaya mereka dapat sampai kepada mencapai keperluan rohani dan jasmani. (al-Anbiya’: 31).

Ayat ini menegaskan bahawa fungsi sebenar bukit-bukau dan gunung-ganang itu ialah sebagai pasak kepada bumi. Meneres kawasan bukit-bukau sesuka hati tanpa kawalan dan sempadan mengundang ketidakseimbangan muka bumi itu sendiri.

Justeru, pembangunan yang seimbang ini amat dititik beratkan dalam ayat Allah yang lain antaranya firman Allah yang bermaksud: Dan bumi ini Kami bentangkan dan Kami letakkan padanya gunung-ganang yang kukuh terdiri, serta Kami tumbuhkan padanya tiap-tiap sesuatu yang tertentu timbangannya. (al-Hijr: 19).

Sistem keseimbangan dalam alam sekitar yang diaturkan Penciptanya ini lebih dikenali sebagai ekosistem yang sangat unik dan sistematik. Seluruh unit dalam sistem telah diprogramkan Allah agar mengikuti sistem atau sunnatullah yang hebat ini.

Sebagai contoh, matahari dan bulan ditentukan Allah berfungsi dalam ekosistem ini selaku penyumbang cahaya mengikut kadar peratusan yang tertentu.

Jika kadar pencahayaan matahari itu melebihi peratusan yang sepatutnya, maka tentulah alam dan hidupan di atas permukaannya bakal mengalami kemusnahan dan kebakaran.

Begitu juga kadar oksigen dalam udara yang telah ditentukan Allah sejumlah 21 peratus, maka andainya kadar oksigen itu menjangkau 50 peratus, nescaya alam dan hidupan di atas permukaannya juga pasti mengalami kemusnahan dan kebakaran. Begitulah al-Quran melukiskan peri pentingnya keseimbangan ekosistem ini untuk dipelihara oleh khalifah Tuhan atau manusia di muka bumi ini sebaik-baiknya. (Tibarah, ‘Afif bin Abdul Fattah. Ruh al-Din al-Islami. Beirut: Dar al-Malayin li al-‘Ilmi. Hal. 57).

Akhirnya, renungilah seruan Ilahi untuk hamba-hamba-Nya bagi menjaga alam sekitar khususnya bukit-bukau dan gunung-ganang ciptaan terindah Tuhan menerusi ayat yang bermaksud: Tidakkah engkau melihat bahawa Allah menurunkan hujan dari langit, lalu Kami keluarkan dengan air hujan itu buah-buahan yang berlainan jenis dan rupanya; dan di antara gunung-ganang pula ada yang mempunyai jalur-jalur serta lorong-lorong putih dan merah, yang berlainan warnanya (tua dan muda) dan ada juga yang hitam legam; Dan demikian pula di antara manusia dan binatang-binatang yang melata serta binatang-binatang ternak, ada yang berlainan jenis dan warnanya? Sebenarnya yang menaruh bimbang dan takut (melanggar perintah) Allah dari kalangan hamba-hamba-Nya hanyalah orang-orang yang berilmu. Sesungguhnya Allah Maha Kuasa, lagi Maha Pengampun. (Faatir: 27 -28)

Sebilangan manusia berpendapat, penjagaan alam sekitar tugas pihak tertentu sahaja. Justeru, bebas membersihkan hutan, membuang sampah merata-rata. Adakah pandangan begini tepat?

Nidzamuddin: Pandangan ini tidak tepat sama sekali! Ia mencerminkan sikap mementingkan diri sendiri dan tidak prihatinnya terhadap warisan alam. Yang sebenarnya, manusia itu adalah unsur atau entiti yang maujud di tengah-tengah alam sekitar, bahkan Islam meletakkan manusia selaku unsur paling penting di dalamnya berbeza dengan hidupan lain yang hanya bersifat material dan kosong maknawi atau rohaninya di mana setiap insan itu bertindak selaku pengurus atau pentadbir alam sekitar itu.

Justeru, dengan kelebihan ciptaan manusia daripada unsur material dan maknawi, maka manusia dinobatkan selaku pemimpin dan khalifah Tuhan yang mengurus dan mentadbir alam dengan sebaik-baiknya.

Firman Allah bermaksud: Dan (ingatkanlah peristiwa) ketika Tuhanmu berfirman kepada malaikat: Sesungguhnya Aku hendak menciptakan manusia dari tanah liat yang kering, yang berasal dari tanah kental yang berubah warna dan baunya. Kemudian apabila Aku sempurnakan kejadiannya, serta Aku tiupkan padanya roh dari (ciptaanKu) maka hendaklah kamu sujud kepadanya. (al-Hijr: 28-29).

Hal ini disokong pula dengan hadis Nabi SAW bermaksud; Sesungguhnya dunia ini cantik dan subur menghijau dan sesungguhnya Allah menjadikan kamu (wahai manusia) selaku pengurusnya dan apa yang terdapat padanya. (Al-Tirmizi, Muhammad bin Isa. 2004. (Rujuk: Jami’ al-Tirmizi. Kitab al-Fitan. Hadis No. 2191. Riyadh: Bait al-Afkar al-Dauliyyah).

 

Faktor keuntungan dan wang ringgit adakalanya mengelabui mata menyebabkan pihak tertentu seperti jurutera, ahli geologi dan sebagainya ‘menipu’ dan menyembunyikan kebenaran tentang bahaya yang mungkin berlaku apabila mendirikan bangunan di lereng-lereng bukit. Apakah balasan Allah terhadap golongan sebegini?

Nidzamuddin: Inilah bahana dan bahayanya apabila pihak yang berwajib dan yang berautoriti dari segi kuasa dan keilmuannya tidak bersikap profesional, telus dan bertanggungjawab.

Ketamakan pada keuntungan yang melambak-lambak akan mengenepikan soal bahaya dan risiko yang bakal menimpa. Ya, memang ada orang yang kaya dan mampu membina semula banglo yang runtuh itu lantaran kekayaannya yang tidak terkira. Lebih mengejutkan ialah ada yang berani membangunkan semula bangunan baru di lokasi yang telah berlaku tanah runtuh.

Namun soal nyawa, harta benda yang terbuang dan musnah begitu sahaja serta ‘pencabulan terhadap keharmonian alam sekitar’ itu sendiri adalah suatu isu yang perlu dititik beratkan.

Pokok-pokok yang subur menghijau bukan sekadar dilihat sebagai ciptaan Allah yang mendamai dan menakjubkan, bahkan Rasulullah SAW mengajar umatnya agar memeliharanya daripada ditebang dan dimusnahkan.

Ini terserlah melalui larangan keras Baginda terhadap usaha penebangannya yang tanpa sebab dan melampau bermaksud: “Barang siapa yang memotong pokok (bidara) - tanpa manfaat atau kepentingan - nescaya Allah SWT akan menghumbankan kepalanya ke jurang neraka”. (Rujuk: Abu Daud, Sulaiman bin al-Asy’ath al-Sijistani. T.th. Sunan Abi Daud. Kitab Adab. No. Hadis: 4561. Juzuk 4. Hal. 361).

Imam Abu Daud mengulas maksud hadis ini setelah disoal mengenainya dengan penjelasannya: “Barangkali yang dimaksudkan dengan amaran Nabi SAW dengan penebangan pokok tanpa sebab ini adalah terhadap pokok-pokok yang terdapat di padang pasir yang dijadikan tempat teduhan orang yang lalu lalang atau para musafir.”

Kalau nak dikiaskan dengan geografi negara kita, maka pokok-pokok di lerengan bukit-bukau itu juga dilarang Islam menebangnya tanpa bersebab dan kawalan. Kalau isu penebangan pokok atau peneresan bukit-bukau ini tidak dikawal secara serius, maka tidak mustahil bahawa kita akan menyaksikan banyak lagi penempatan di kawasan-kawasan bukit akan menjadi mangsa tanah runtuh ini.

 

Adakah kepincangan yang berlaku sekarang disebabkan kurangnya sifat ihsan di kalangan kita sehingga adakalanya kita menipu dalam sukatan pembinaan dan sebagainya?

Nidzamuddin: Ya, saya setuju bahawa ia adalah antara faktor-faktor utama yang menyumbang kepada kemusnahan alam ini. Kerakusan membolot projek-projek yang mega dan bernilai juta ringgit kadang-kadang menghakis norma-norma kemanusiaan dan perasaan ihsan sesama insan bahkan terhadap alam sekitar itu sendiri.

Memang benar alam tidak menjerit dan melolong apabila diperlakukan penebangan atau peneresan bukit-bukau dengan sewenang-wenangnya, namun kerakusan ini akan berakhir dengan dentuman bangunan runtuh, suara tangisan mangsa tanah runtuh dan kerosakan harta benda yang begitu besar.

Justeru, Allah melarang keras penipuan ini khususnya dalam sukatan dengan firman-Nya: Kecelakaan besar bagi orang-orang yang curang (dalam timbangan dan sukatan). Iaitu mereka yang apabila menerima sukatan dari orang lain mereka mengambilnya dengan cukup. Dan (sebaliknya) apabila mereka menyukat atau menimbang untuk orang lain, mereka kurangi. Tidakkah mereka menyangka bahawa mereka akan dibangkitkan (hidup semula sesudah mati)? (al-Mutaffifin: 1-4).

Perbuatan merosakkan alam sekitar adalah sama seperti menafikan sikap adil dan ihsan, sedangkan kedua-dua sikap ini merupakan perintah Allah yang perlu dilaksanakan. Perbuatan mencemar dan merosakkan alam sekitar juga menodai fungsi kekhalifahan yang telah dibebankan kepada manusia.

Ini kerana bumi bukan milik manusia untuk dia berbuat sesuka hati tetapi bumi ini adalah milik Allah yang dipinjamkan kepada manusia yang kemudiannya dituntut untuk menjalankan segala perintah Allah di atasnya.

Oleh yang demikian, manusia perlu ingat bahawa dia dilantik sebagai khalifah Allah di atas muka bumi yang juga milik Allah. Maka tidak sepatutnya manusia bertindak seperti raja yang seolah-olah tidak akan dipertanggungjawabkan di atas segala yang telah dikerjakannya.

[Baca]

Leaders Lie, Civilians Die, and Lessons of History are Ignored - By Robert Fisk (LATEST UPDATE - 30/12/08)

29 December 2008, The Independent UK

We've got so used to the carnage of the Middle East that we don't care any more - providing we don't offend the Israelis. It's not clear how many of the Gaza dead are civilians, but the response of the Bush administration, not to mention the pusillanimous reaction of Gordon Brown, reaffirm for Arabs what they have known for decades: however they struggle against their antagonists, the West will take Israel's side. As usual, the bloodbath was the fault of the Arabs - who, as we all know, only understand force.

Ever since 1948, we've been hearing this balderdash from the Israelis - just as Arab nationalists and then Arab Islamists have been peddling their own lies: that the Zionist "death wagon" will be overthrown, that all Jerusalem will be "liberated". And always Mr Bush Snr or Mr Clinton or Mr Bush Jnr or Mr Blair or Mr Brown have called upon both sides to exercise "restraint" - as if the Palestinians and the Israelis both have F-18s and Merkava tanks and field artillery. Hamas's home-made rockets have killed just 20 Israelis in eight years, but a day-long blitz by Israeli aircraft that kills almost 300 Palestinians is just par for the course.

The blood-splattering has its own routine. Yes, Hamas provoked Israel's anger, just as Israel provoked Hamas's anger, which was provoked by Israel, which was provoked by Hamas, which ... See what I mean? Hamas fires rockets at Israel, Israel bombs Hamas, Hamas fires more rockets and Israel bombs again and ... Got it? And we demand security for Israel - rightly - but overlook this massive and utterly disproportionate slaughter by Israel. It was Madeleine Albright who once said that Israel was "under siege" - as if Palestinian tanks were in the streets of Tel Aviv.

By last night, the exchange rate stood at 296 Palestinians dead for one dead Israeli. Back in 2006, it was 10 Lebanese dead for one Israeli dead. This weekend was the most inflationary exchange rate in a single day since - the 1973 Middle East War? The 1967 Six Day War? The 1956 Suez War? The 1948 Independence/Nakba War? It's obscene, a gruesome game - which Ehud Barak, the Israeli Defence Minister, unconsciously admitted when he spoke this weekend to Fox TV. "Our intention is to totally change the rules of the game," Barak said.

Exactly. Only the "rules" of the game don't change. This is a further slippage on the Arab-Israeli exchanges, a percentage slide more awesome than Wall Street's crashing shares, though of not much interest in the US which - let us remember - made the F-18s and the Hellfire missiles which the Bush administration pleads with Israel to use sparingly.

Quite a lot of the dead this weekend appear to have been Hamas members, but what is it supposed to solve? Is Hamas going to say: "Wow, this blitz is awesome - we'd better recognise the state of Israel, fall in line with the Palestinian Authority, lay down our weapons and pray we are taken prisoner and locked up indefinitely and support a new American 'peace process' in the Middle East!" Is that what the Israelis and the Americans and Gordon Brown think Hamas is going to do?

Yes, let's remember Hamas's cynicism, the cynicism of all armed Islamist groups. Their need for Muslim martyrs is as crucial to them as Israel's need to create them. The lesson Israel thinks it is teaching - come to heel or we will crush you - is not the lesson Hamas is learning. Hamas needs violence to emphasise the oppression of the Palestinians - and relies on Israel to provide it. A few rockets into Israel and Israel obliges.

Not a whimper from Tony Blair, the peace envoy to the Middle East who's never been to Gaza in his current incarnation. Not a bloody word.

We hear the usual Israeli line. General Yaakov Amidror, the former head of the Israeli army's "research and assessment division" announced that "no country in the world would allow its citizens to be made the target of rocket attacks without taking vigorous steps to defend them". Quite so. But when the IRA were firing mortars over the border into Northern Ireland, when their guerrillas were crossing from the Republic to attack police stations and Protestants, did Britain unleash the RAF on the Irish Republic? Did the RAF bomb churches and tankers and police stations and zap 300 civilians to teach the Irish a lesson? No, it did not. Because the world would have seen it as criminal behaviour. We didn't want to lower ourselves to the IRA's level.

Yes, Israel deserves security. But these bloodbaths will not bring it. Not since 1948 have air raids protected Israel. Israel has bombed Lebanon thousands of times since 1975 and not one has eliminated "terrorism". So what was the reaction last night? The Israelis threaten ground attacks. Hamas waits for another battle. Our Western politicians crouch in their funk holes. And somewhere to the east - in a cave? a basement? on a mountainside? - a well-known man in a turban smiles.
[Baca]

Obama Adviser Aligns with White House in Criticism of Rocket Attacks on Israel - By Ewin MacAskill (LATEST UPDATE - 30/12/08)

29 December 2008, the Guardian/UK

WASHINGTON - Barack Obama yesterday appeared to line up behind the Bush administration in support of Israel's attack on Gaza.

Speaking on CBS's Face the Nation, his chief adviser, David Axelrod, initially repeated the Obama team's formula that there could only be one president at a time and that president was George Bush.

But he went on to recall comments that Obama made in July at Sderot, the Israeli town that is the target of rocket attacks from Palestinian militants in Gaza.

At the time, Obama said : "If somebody was sending rockets into my house where my two daughters sleep at night, I'm going to do everything in my power to stop that. I would expect Israelis to do the same thing."

A similar sentiment was expressed by Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, on Saturday. She said: "The United States strongly condemns the repeated rocket and mortar attacks against Israel and holds Hamas responsible for breaking the ceasefire and for the renewal of violence in Gaza." She added: "The ceasefire should be restored immediately. The United States calls on all concerned to address the urgent humanitarian needs of the innocent people of Gaza."

Gordon Johndroe, the White House security spokesman, also blamed Hamas, whom he referred to as terrorists and thugs. Rice briefed Obama by phone for about eight minutes on Saturday and further calls are planned to ensure he is up to speed on the issue by the time he takes office.

Although Obama has repeatedly said he would not comment on policy matters until he becomes president on 20 January, he has largely abandoned this in relation to the economic crisis, on which he has spoken regularly over the last few weeks, often at odds with Bush. So far, Obama has given no hint on his policy on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, though he has said finding a peace plan would be an early priority of his administration.

Before running for president, he provoked suspicion among Israelis and some US Jewish groups when he expressed sympathy for the plight of the Palestinians. But after winning the Democratic nomination earlier this year he veered in the other direction, voicing strong support for Israel in a speech in Washington to the Israeli lobby group Aipac.

Yesterday , the Washington Post quoted an unnamed senior Bush administration official saying he thought the Israelis launched the attack because of uncertainty over Obama's policy. The official said the Israelis acted "because they want it to be over before the next administration comes in". He added: "They can't predict how the next administration will handle it. And this is not the way they want to start with the new administration."

Israeli officials denied this, saying the Israeli election in February was more a factor than Obama's take-over.

Bush started his presidency determined not to expend much effort on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, after watching his predecessor, Bill Clinton, devote his last months in office in a futile attempt to bring peace.

Over the last year, Bush has made half-hearted attempts at reheating peace plans.

Obama's proposed secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, and various other foreign policy advisers would like to mount another attempt at resolving the conflict. But Obama has other foreign policy issues competing for his attention such as the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq and the escalating conflict in Afghanistan.
[Baca]

World Rallies Around Palestinians Amid Gaza Offensive - By CNN (LATEST UPDATE - 30/12/08)

LONDON, England - Israeli attacks on suspected Hamas strongholds in Gaza have triggered protests in more than a dozen countries.

The attacks entered their third day Monday, with more than 300 people in Gaza reported killed and hundreds more wounded. Israel says the military assault is in response to ongoing rocket strikes on Israel, which have killed two Israelis.

In London, England, dozens of protesters gathered outside the Israeli Embassy, waving flags and trying to push their way closer to the building, as police tried to hold them back and erect a barricade.

Police in Germany said about 2,000 protesters marched peacefully down Berlin's Kurfuerstendamm Boulevard and dispersed after about three hours.
Protesters also have taken to the streets in Denmark, France, Italy and Spain, according to news reports. There also were reports of demonstrations in Caracas, Venezuela.

Iranian media reported that thousands took part in anti-Israel demonstrations in Tehran on Monday, which the government declared a day of mourning for the Palestinians in Gaza .

Photographs of the rallies posted by Iran's semi-official Fars News Agency showed black-shrouded women and men holding shoes in the air -- widely considered an insult in the Middle East -- while others held Palestinian flags and signs that said "Down with U.S.A." in English and Farsi.

Greek riot police clashed with protesters in Athens during a demonstration outside the Israeli Embassy, according to police and images broadcast on state television.

Protesters hurled stones in an attempt to break through the police cordon around the heavily secured embassy. Police responded with tear gas.

In Iraq, hundreds of supporters of Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr demonstrated in al-Mustansiriya Square in eastern Baghdad. The demonstrators carried
Iraqi and Palestinian flags, banners and pictures of al-Sadr and his father.

The demonstrators threw an Israeli flag on the ground, put President Bush's picture on top of it and set both on fire.

In the Muslim world, demonstrations also were held in Jordan, Egypt, Pakistan, Indonesia, Libya and Bahrain, the BBC and other news outlets reported.

Also, thousands of Lebanese demonstrators packed the streets of Beirut as part of a rally called by the militant group Hezbollah. Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah addressed the crowd via satellite from an undisclosed location.

Protests were also held in Israel, where students at universities in Haifa, Tel Aviv and Jerusalem demonstrated against the Israeli military operation, ynetnews.com reported.
[Baca]

About those "Rocket Attacks" against Israel. . . . . they DESERVED every one of them - By Hal Turner (LATEST UPDATE - 30/12/08)

West Bank & Gaza Strip, Palestine -- As the world enters day #3 of the Israeli military attacks against the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the U.S. media is replete with stories about how Israel is merely defending itself from "rocket attacks." Let's talk about that.

The so-called "rockets" are little more than Bottle Rockets used by American children or professional fireworks displays used to celebrate on the Fourth of July.

Most of the "rockets" being fired at Israel, land harmlessly in the desert. Rarely if ever is anyone injured by these rockets and NOT ONE person has been killed in Israel by these rockets in years!

Yet within the past 3 days, the Israeli military has seen fit to kill over 700 unarmed men, women and children inside the

West Bank and Gaza strip. Think about that for a moment. No dead Israelis has prompted 700 dead Palestinians.

Let's move on to yet another item that the U.S. Media is repeating over and over and over: The Palestinians freely elected the Hamas Party into power and, according to Israel, "Hamas is a terrorist organization."

In fact, many dimwitted Americans swallow this line of reasoning hook, line and sinker, then repeat it as though it makes any sense. Let's consider this argument for a moment.

Yes, the people of Palestine freely elected the Hamas Party into power. That is their right. If my fellow Americans think that bombing people over who they elect is a valid thing, then let me know.

You see, I think the Democrat Party here in the United States is a terrorist organization. If bombing people based upon who they freely elect is a valid thing to do, does that mean I can start bombing Democrats?

Ahhhhhh, now you see how the argument against Hamas falls flat on its face!

One thing that is absolutely NOT being reported anywhere in the U.S. Media is WHY the rockets are being fired into Israel. Do you know why they're being fired? I do:

For over a year, Israel has sealed the borders of the West Bank and Gaza strip, not allowing anyone to work, earn money or - here's the real problem - get food deliveries IN.

The 1.4 million people inside Gaza are literally being starved to death by Israel.

The only way food has gotten in is through smuggling and not nearly enough can be smuggled in.

Let me ask you something: If someone was intentionally starving YOU to death, would you try to hurt them?

That's what is really taking place over in the cesspool known as Israel. Yet the U.S. Media isn't bothering to tell the American people about this. If the American people knew that Israel was intentionally starving over 1.4 million people to death, it would change the way the American people react, which would put pressure on the American government, which would then put pressure on Israel.

Here's the worst part: Even though the American people have been intentionally kept in the dark by the media, the U.S. government knows these facts and still does not intervene.

The American government knows that Israel has not allowed Palestinians to go to work for over a year. The American government knows that Israel has not allowed food shipments into Gaza or the West Bank for over a year. The American government knows that Palestinians have been starving to death. This is genocide, taking place right in front of us!

The American government has not only stood-by and done nothing to stop this genocide, they have actually aided and abetted it by supplying Israel with the weapons used to perpetrate the genocide.

The federal government is herewith reminded that there is no power delegated to the federal government by the Constitution, to enforce international genocide laws. They are further reminded that there is nothing in the Constitution prohibiting that power to the states.

As such, pursuant to Amendment Ten of the Constitution for the United States, the power to enforce international genocide laws falls to the states respectively or to the People.

As citizens, WE THE PEOPLE have the legal authority to enforce those genocide laws upon the federal government.

On January 20, 2009, there will be about four million of us citizens in Washington, DC. for the Inauguration. Wouldn't it be something if a hundred thousand of us came to Washington, DC with guns and decided to exercise our powers under the Tenth Amendment and arrest outgoing President Bush, the House of Representatives and the Senate for aiding and abetting genocide?

We would outnumber and outgun all your cops and soldiers.

I think it would be a really good idea for those of you in the U.S. federal government to reign-in the criminal state of Israel that you are presently aiding and abetting. In fact, I insist.
[Baca]

Who Is Bernard Madoff? - By Christopher Bollyn (LATEST UPDATE - 29/12/08)

By Christopher Bollyn
"It's all just one big lie."

- Bernard Madoff to his sons about his $50 billion "Ponzi" scheme

Fraudster Bernard L. Madoff was national treasurer of the American Jewish Congress and Yeshiva University. So where did the $50 billion go?

The latest massive financial scandal is the giant $50 billion pyramid or "Ponzi" scheme run by a New York Zionist Jew, Bernard Lawrence Madoff. How can anyone lose $50 thousand million? Where did the $50 billion disappear to? Israel?

Madoff told two "senior employees," i.e. his sons, Mark and Andrew, at his apartment the night before his arrest that the Madoff hedge fund and his investment advisory business was "basically, a giant Ponzi scheme," according to court documents. His investment fund business was insolvent, and had been for years.

Many of Madoff's victims were fellow Jews looking for consistent returns on their investment, which his "Ponzi" scheme had been able to provide until a large number of investors tried to withdraw some $7 billion worth of funds in November. As the Wall Street Journal reported:

News of money manager Bernard Madoff's alleged fraud sent shock waves through upscale communities in the New York area and Florida where wealthy individuals had entrusted billions of dollars to Mr. Madoff for decades. Ira Roth, a New Jersey resident, who says his family has about $1 million invested through Mr. Madoff's firm, is "in a state of panic."

"This is going to kill so many people," said a current investor in Mr. Madoff's fund. "It's absolutely awful."

Many of his clients knew Mr. Madoff personally but had little understanding of his investment strategy, which reported remarkably consistent returns of some 1% per month. They often referred to it as a "black box."

Madoff also allegedly said that the losses from the fraud were at least $50 billion, according to the criminal complaint. He told his sons that he was "finished," and that he had "absolutely nothing" and "it's all just one big lie."

WHERE DID THE MONEY GO?

So who is Bernard L. Madoff? Apart from running his "investment company" and being a former chairman and director of the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASDAQ), Madoff is a very committed Jewish Zionist who has served as the treasurer of two leading Zionist organizations. Like Richard Fuld of Lehman Brothers, Sanford Weill of Citibank, and Maurice Greenberg of A.I.G., the major culprits behind the $2 trillion bail-out, Madoff is another New York Zionist Jew who has committed a massive financial fraud and cheated Americans and others out of untold billions of dollars.

From the left: Bernard L. Madoff, Yeshiva University Board treasurer and Board chairman, Syms School; Sy Syms, vice chairman, Board of Trustees; and Josh S. Weston.

Madoff is a former national treasurer of the American Jewish Congress (AJC) of New York City, one of the major fund-raising organizations for the state of Israel. Founded by the Hungarian Zionist rabbi Stephen S. Wise, the AJC claims to be "the first Jewish Defense Agency to support the establishment of a Jewish state" and boycott Germany in the 1930s. Wise was a Zionist who had been trained at the Jewish Theological Seminary in New York City, where Michael Chertoff's rabbi father and grandfather also studied and taught.

Madoff is also the treasurer of Yeshiva University, a private Jewish university in New York City, where he is chairman of the board of the university's business school, the Sy Syms School of Business, which he has endowed with large donations, from his "Ponzi" scheme no doubt.

Belfer Hall is the main building at Yeshiva University. Isn't it lovely?

Madoff has been a member of Yeshiva University’s Board of Trustees since 1996, and was elected chairman of the board of Syms School of Business in 2000. (Yeshiva University is clearly trying to erase traces of Madoff from their website, but the cached versions remain.) At Syms, where Madoff is the chairman of the board, "Jewish tradition provides the framework for consideration of ethical issues, an integral part of the student's education." Does the "Jewish tradition" taught at Yeshiva U. support giant "Ponzi" schemes like the one run by their chairman? Is this the kind of business they teach the students at Syms? Cheat the "goyim," i.e. non-Jews, and steal their money?

That is exactly what the Talmud teaches, make no mistake about it. It is the main reason that Jews have been despised and expelled from so many nations throughout history.

Anyone familiar with the teachings of the Talmud, i.e. "Jewish tradition," will know that such anti-Christian schemes are at the heart of such an "education." This is why so many of the financial criminals involved in the current Zionist-produced "credit crisis" are Jewish Zionists who have been indoctrinated in such "Jewish traditions." The Zionist criminals involved in 9-11 and the cover-up of the truth are all tied to the Jewish Theological Seminary in New York, which is a similar Zionist institution.

Yeshiva University has a branch in Israel, as does the American Jewish Congress. Madoff has been the main treasurer of both Zionist institutions during the period he ran his giant "Ponzi" scheme. If Madoff has lost billions of dollars, as is alleged, these institutions should certainly be investigated as possible recipients of stolen money. The Zionist criminal structure relies on its tax-exempt "religious" network of schools and charities. These institutions are the frame of the Zionist criminal and racist network and should be investigated and closed if they are found to be teaching racist ideologies. Jewish racism is no different than any other racism and should not be tolerated in a free and democratic society like America
[Baca]

Part 6 - Common Sense - The Crisis of Common Sense - By Matthias Chang (LATEST UPDATE - 28/12/08)

By Matthias Chang   

Thinking & Common Sense

God gave us a brain to think, to think naturally and in simple terms, and not in a complicated way.

When we think naturally and use common sense to address problems we will be able to arrive at simple solutions.

But our education system tortures us mentally and forces us to think in complicated ways. Our teachers, economists, politicians and so-called experts in God and religion make mountains out of mole-hills, turning simple truths to complex arguments and “scientific theories and equations”.

These experts need to make things look difficult to survive and to make sure that we have to rely upon them for solutions. It is often said that, “in the land of the blind, the man with one eye is the King”.

Thinking used to be a pleasure and so very invigorating. But now experts have ensured that thinking is difficult and tiring, so burdensome, that we don’t think at all.

In the result, common sense is thrown out of the window, and we have been conditioned to rely on our mental crutch, the so-called experts to think for us.

How sad.

It Is So Difficult To Understand The Financial Crisis

Many have expressed to me that they are overwhelmed by the complexity of the global financial tsunami and are absolutely confused as to how to prepare and survive the crisis.

When I explained in simple terms, they refused to accept the explanations as to them “it was too simple. It must be more complicated as otherwise how can the crisis become a global fiasco?

Consider the following and my simple explanation:

1.   financial engineering   new ways of gambling

2.   Investors           gamblers (suckers at that)

3.   Stock & Futures Markets       casinos

4.   Financial Analysts   casinos’ salesmen / women

5.   Bonds                 I.O.Us.

6.   Banks                 Dishonest Money-lenders
                                                          (actual money-lenders licensed not as
                                                          banks, but as money-lenders, cannot
                                                          create “money out of thin air”. They have
                                                          to use their own capital – 100% to lend)

7.   Currencies / fiat money        toilet papers

8.   Derivative markets                ponzi scheme

So many people have difficulty accepting my explanations as the simple reality. This is even after the recent exposé of the US$50 Billion fraud by Bernard Madoff, the former chairman of NASDAQ. He declared to the FBI, that his scheme was essentially a Ponzi scheme (i.e. using one set of “investors’ money” to pay off an earlier set of “investors”).                            

Banks worldwide have collapsed!

Why?

Two reasons – (i) they gambled at the casino and lost trillions and (ii) almost all their borrowers that borrowed huge sums (leveraging 30 times or more i.e. if a borrower has $1 million capital, he can borrower $30 million) have defaulted.

Common sense tells us that if our income is only $X and we borrow 30 times in excess of $X, there is no way that we can repay the debt, unless our gambling bets pay out in excess of 30 times the original amount of $X.

Common sense tells us that if our total family monthly income is e.g. RM3,500,  we cannot afford a lifestyle that requires a monthly expenditure of RM10,000 financed by credit-cards with only 5% monthly payment on the outstanding. When interests start piling up on the accumulated monthly outstanding, a point will be reached whereby the cardholder cannot even keep up with the payment of the interests. The cardholder defaults and he gets sued by the lawyers acting for the credit-card companies and or banks.

Common sense tells us that if you are conned into buying something allegedly worth US$500,000 when its actual value is US$5,000 and you borrowed to buy the inflated “asset”, there is no way that you will continue paying the installments and the interests on such an acquisition. The bank on the other hand is stuck with an “asset” supposedly worth US$500,000 but its actual worth is only US$5,000 or less.

Common sense tells us that the banks and the governments (fearing a systemic banking collapse) will lie and cover up the con-game until it cannot cover up anymore as too many banks are having the same problems and more importantly, the con-game cannot be covered-up anymore because borrowers are walking away and saying to the banks and governments – “Screw you! You conned us, you carry the shit.”

Common sense tells us that these so-called assets which “investors” have invested cannot be real assets, but mere papers masquerading as assets (such as CDOs, synthetic CDOs and CDO Squared – toilet papers). Therefore, so-called sophisticated “investors” were borrowing toilet papers to “invest” in toilet paper assets!

Common sense tells us, and thinking naturally and in simple terms will enable us to conclude, that only greedy people can be lured by such con-games and that when gambling at such casinos, these so-called sophisticated investors were not using common sense.

Common sense tells us that we, the remaining hardworking people should not allow any government to use our tax revenue to bailout such reckless and greedy b@#st@#ds.

Common sense tells us that when gamblers lose millions at the Las Vegas, Macau or Genting Highlands casinos, no government can justify and or dare to bailout such stupid and greedy gamblers. We would vote them out of office.

Common sense tells us that since all these “clever people” by their reckless, irresponsible and fraudulent conduct have destroyed the economy, they should be prosecuted and sent to jail and the keys thrown away!

Common sense tells us that a system that allows such frauds and gambling should be banned and made illegal.

Common sense tells us that when common thieves rob a jewelry shop or a bank, they are sentenced to long terms of imprisonment and whipped as well, these sophisticated thieves should be likewise be whipped and sent to prison for life imprisonment, as their destruction is a million times more devastating than the common thieves!

Common sense tells us that when times are hard, we should be prudent and thrifty to overcome and survive the hardships, so why are we encouraged to borrow more and more and to spend, spend and spend?

Common sense tells us that when a shop is offering a discount, a reduction in the price of a product, the shop-keeper is encouraging us to spend and buy the goods.

Common sense tells us therefore, interest charges and penalty interests are the cost of a debt / borrowings from the perspective of the borrower and revenues and profits, when the debt is fully paid, from the point of view of the lender.

Common sense tells us that it is not out of kindness that banks lower interest charges. Like the shop-keeper, it is to encourage more borrowings. More borrowings mean more debts and ultimately more profits for the bankers.

Common sense tells us that we should not get into debts unnecessarily and not to borrow to purchase things that are not within our income and our ability to repay.

Common sense tells us that we should not commit fraud and or be a party to a fraud.

Common sense tells us more importantly, not to be greedy and lust for material wealth.

Common sense tells us that we should be angry, very angry with the so-called “sophisticated and up-right people” who commit fraud and the regulatory authorities and political leaders who cover-up their crimes.

Finally, common sense tells us that we should take action to put a stop to these crimes and scandals.

Please use common sense and do something before it is too late!
[Baca]

Traitors Of The Palestinian Liberation Struggle - By Matthias Chang (LATEST UPDATE - 30/12/08)

By Matthias Chang
Tuesday, 30 December 2008 10:42

Get Rid Of The “Islamic Label” For The Struggle Of The Palestinians Is Not About Any Religion But For National Liberation From Zionist Anglo-American Oppression & Occupation

Over the years, I have held back my criticisms of the Palestinian Authority in the hope that they would strive to unite the Palestinian people to defeat Zionist Israel.

The last few years have witnessed the complete betrayal of the Palestinian liberation struggle by the so-called President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, the Zionist Anglo-American stooge! There were betrayals in the past but none so blatant and shameful as that of recent years, especially by this stooge!

This man is a traitor to the heroic struggle of the entire Palestinian nation. He must be brought to trial before a War Crimes Tribunal together with his criminal masters, Ariel Sharon, Ehud Barack etc. for the wanton slaughter of the people of Gaza and the West Bank.

In the last Palestinian General Elections, the majority of the people in Gaza voted for the Hamas government and booted out the corrupt Fatah-led government. It is not for us to judge the people’s choice. They have chosen and the world must respect that choice. This is the will of the people of Gaza.

Since the victory of the Hamas government, the Fatah leadership have collaborated with the Zionist leaders and other Arab leaders to undermine the popular will of the people of Gaza and the Hamas government.

This treachery by the Arab regimes in collusion with Mahmoud Abbas is a reflection of their fear that sooner or later the people in the Middle East will launch armed rebellion against their corrupt rule.

Their fear intensified when Lebanon under the leadership of Hizbullah struck a devastating blow to Israel’s grand design in the 2nd Lebanon War. Driven by panic and insecurity they colluded and connived with the Zionist Anglo-American war party to destroy the national liberation struggle of the Palestinian people.

The so-called Islamic nations never ceased to call for a jihad against the Zionist Anglo-American war party so as to cover-up their true intentions. They are all paying mere lip-service. Al-Qaeda, a CIA construct is financed by the Saudi regime and the War on Terror is but a cover to prolong the rule of corrupt Arab regimes in collusion with the Zionist Anglo-American war party.

The strategic mistake of the Palestinian Liberation Movement was their agreement with the Zionist Anglo-American war party to establish the Palestinian Authority, which was given a façade of “government authority” in exchange for the abandonment of armed struggle and the recognition by the Zionist Anglo-American colonial powers of their status.

Since that time, the Palestinian people have been living on hand-outs from countries near and far which have vested interests in the Middle East. The armed struggle collapsed and though there were the two Intifadas, these struggles were mere tactical resistance devoid of any strategic objectives. They were more of an expression of frustration and hopelessness than a coordinated strategic resistance with clear military and political objectives.

In fact they were devoid of political objectives. The leadership is even fearful of announcing their independence from Zionist Israel! So what is the use of having a “government” when it is not a government of an independent state but a Bantustan!

The sacrifices of thousands of young heroic fighters were betrayed by the Palestinian leadership.

The on / off armed resistance served and continue to serve both the interests of Israel and the corrupt Palestinian Authority Leadership. In the case of the former, the Zionists used the alleged threat to its survival to obtain more military aid from the US to further oppress the Palestinians and occupy the Holy Land. For the Palestinian Authority, the state-of-war tension enables its leaders to hold on to power and maintain the status quo.

The recent statement from the Fatah leadership that if Israel succeeds in liquidating the Hamas government, they would be ready to re-enter Gaza and assume power again, is the irrefutable evidence that Mahmoud Abbas and his subservient entourage are complicit in this wanton slaughter of their fellow Palestinians in Gaza.

I have often said that the Palestinians should learn from the experience of the valiant and heroic struggle of the Vietnamese people against the US if they desire final victory over the Zionist Anglo-American war party.

Palestinians must realize that it counts for nothing to be recognized by the UN and or countries supposedly sympathetic to its cause. If the Palestinian people need another country to emulate, look no further than Cuba. Years of sanctions by the Western powers have not cowed the people and although they may not have all the luxuries of the so-called developed nations, they have their independence and sovereignty and did not have to rely on hand-outs to survive.

What matters is total military victory in the battlefield and the establishment of the single state of Palestine. Such a state derives its own legitimacy, a legitimacy based on the just struggle for liberation and self-determination from fascist occupation and oppression.

The Palestinian people should turn their backs on the opportunistic and corrupt Arab regimes and all the so-called Islamic nations, and reject all their financial aid. This is because your resistance against the Zionist Anglo-American war party has indirectly prolonged the corrupt rule of these Arab and Islamic regimes.

The struggle of the Palestinian people is not the struggle of only the Palestinians of the Islamic faith. Palestinians of other faiths are in this heroic struggle as well. It is a struggle that cut across all faiths, race and culture. Palestinians should not fall into the trap of identifying itself with any specific religion. The Palestinian struggle is a glorious struggle for liberation and independence and the return to their rightful land and homes! Do not let the corrupt Arab regimes and so-called Islamic nations hijack your struggle for Islam.

It is these nations that have financed Muslim extremists to provide the Zionist Anglo-American war party a pretext to launch the War on Terror. And by their deviousness, they have succeeded in lumping your just struggle as “terrorism” and your heroic resistance army as “terrorists”.

This is the most evil propaganda waged against the Palestinian people. Get rid of the “Islamic label” for the struggle of liberation, dignity and independence has nothing to do with any specific religion. Look to the Vietnamese. The majority of the people are of the Buddhist faith but they never aligned their struggles as one between Buddhism and American Imperialism. It was a struggle for national liberation from colonial oppression! Period!

Justice and truth will be the Palestinians’ strongest allies, not hand-outs with strings attached. Resist the infection of corruption and the subservience of the Arab regimes and the so-called Islamic Nations to the Zionist Anglo-American war party.

Surviving without such hand-outs will not be easy. The struggle will initially be doubly hard and painful, but once the Palestinian people are focused on the right strategy, victory is assured.

The Arab and the so-called Islamic Nations have all betrayed your struggle. Do not mistake their token gesture of financial assistance and statements of support as genuine. These regimes have their own agendas and often they exploit your heroic struggle for domestic political agendas!

The reason is simple.

These regimes cannot be seen not to support your struggle as otherwise they would be condemned by their citizens. On the other hand, these cowards and hypocrites fear that in the event your heroic struggle succeeds, their own citizens may resort to armed struggle to seek justice and rid their country of corruption and feudal culture.

In the circumstances, Palestinians should not place their survival in the hands of these corrupt regimes. Do not be swayed by their call for a Jihad. It is easy to make such calls, but you need only to examine their actions in the last fifty years – which Arab or Islamic Nation have sent their so-called armies to assist your struggle?

The 1967 and 1973 wars against Israel were not waged for the liberation of Palestine, but for their own survival and insidious bargains with the devil incarnate – the Presidents and Prime Ministers of US and UK respectively!

Palestine and Palestinians have been made the “bargaining tools” of the corrupt Arab and Islamic Nations vis-à-vis the Western powers who lust for the oil riches – mere pawns in the geo-political chessboard!

Better to die with dignity than to live a life of slavery under the Zionist Anglo-American oppression and occupation.

There is but one way to succeed and achieve total victory:

SELF-RELIANCE AND UTMOST FAITH IN YOUR OWN STRENGTH AND RESILIENCE.

THE PATH IS CLEAR – WAGE PEOPLE’S WAR UNTIL TOTAL VICTORY.
[Baca]

For Hamas, Logic Led to Cease-Fire’s End

RAMALLAH, West Bank — On the wall of the Israeli government press office in Jerusalem on Monday was a stack of yellow Post-it notes pasted one on top of the next, with the number 10,048 scrawled on the top one. That was the number of Palestinian rockets and mortar shells fired into Israel from Gaza since 2001.

It was quickly out of date, and other Post-its will soon be stacked on top.

For Israel, the tally has prompted internal debate about how to counter the threat from Hamas’s homemade rockets and those of other armed Palestinian factions.

For Hamas, the very existence of that number in an Israeli office is an achievement. As plumes of smoke rise from Gaza, it is Hamas that dominates the television news and newspaper headlines.

It is not only the publicity, but also the status conveyed on Hamas as the Palestinians’ principal resistance. Its secular rival, Fatah, sits on the sidelines, marginal to the violence unfolding in Gaza, from which Hamas effectively expelled it at gunpoint in the summer of 2007.

The questions remain: Why did Hamas end its six-month cease-fire on Dec. 19? Will it — can it — unleash suicide bombers into Israel in retaliation? And will the devastation in Gaza make Palestinians fall into line behind Hamas, as they reliably have in the past, or will Hamas lose their support as Gazans count the escalating cost in blood and destruction?

Even knowing that retaliation was certain, Hamas seemed to end the cease-fire in part because of its longstanding discipline and consistency. For years it has preached to Palestinians the rejectionist credo that Fatah negotiated with Israel and got nowhere; Hamas’s way of armed force, it argued year in and year out, was the only way.

And so it appears that Hamas turned its logic against its own cease-fire: Hamas’s supreme leader, Khaled Meshal, said on Saturday that the truce had yielded few results. If there were no specific benefits — like freed prisoners or an end to Israeli blockages on Gaza — then the option, again, was a return to violence. It may also have calculated that the rockets into Israel — 60 in one day — would restore its status among Palestinians as the champion of “resistance” against the Zionist enemy, whose soldiers and settlers are no longer in Gaza within reach of Hamas’s military wing.

A major question remains whether Hamas expected the shock-and-awe Israeli offensive that has left Gaza reeling.

The outcome, for the moment, is far from clear because neither side has yet deployed the full arsenal available to it.

Some in Gaza believe Hamas wants Israeli soldiers to enter the Gaza Strip, because it has had 18 months to smuggle weapons in through tunnels from the Sinai since it seized control of the territory from Fatah. For the last several years, after Israel’s pullout from Gaza in 2005 and its erection of a barrier around the West Bank, it has been harder to strike at Israelis.

Israel, though, is aware of the risks and will not reflexively mount a large-scale military return to Gaza.

As Israeli tanks rumbled on the outskirts of Gaza and explosions and machine-gun fire echoed through the night late on Monday, it is too early to gauge the effect the renewed violence is having on Palestinian opinion. The key issue is whether Palestinians will blame Israel for raining fire down upon them, as Hamas hopes. Or blame Hamas for provoking it, as Fatah, Israel and its Western allies hope.

Right now Palestinians are blaming Israel, loudly.

This weekend, the Palestinian newspaper Al Hayat al Jadida printed a black front page with a headline blaring: “1,000 Martyrs and Wounded in Saturday Slaughter.”

More important is whether once away from television cameras and foreign journalists, Palestinians will vote for Hamas in presidential and parliamentary elections, both scheduled roughly within a year.

At the Shuafat refugee camp on the northern outskirts of Jerusalem on Sunday, masked Palestinian youths burned tires and used slingshots to hurl stones at Israeli soldiers.

Mohammed, 13, predicted bloody Hamas reprisals. “Hamas will be the one that will bomb green Egged buses, and we will go back to the way it was,” he said, referring to the Israeli bus carrier that is often a target of suicide bombers.

Others were more doubtful. Ahmad, 14, said he supported “neither one nor the other,” complaining that Hamas and Fatah spent too much time fighting each other instead of working for Palestinian unity.

A few miles north in Ramallah anti-Israeli and American sentiment was high among a small crowd of protesters gathered, incongruously, beneath a Stars and Bucks Cafe. Even here, in Fatah’s heartland, people said they admired Hamas for its willingness to take on a regional superpower.

Challenged on the point that firing highly inaccurate rockets from Gaza into Israel carried a huge cost in retaliation, one 30-year-old Palestinian who refused to give his name compared the attacks to the impotent yet defiant gesture of the Iraqi journalist Muntader al-Zaidi, who has become a folk hero across the Arab world for throwing his shoes at President Bush.

Mustafa Saleh, 37, said: “I am originally Fatah and my voice will always be Fatah. But Hamas is resisting and we are a nation under occupation. I support the resistance, even here in the West Bank.”

Hamas hopes such sentiments will bring it new supporters.

But as he watched the protesters go by, Mohanad Salah, 42, said that emotions would calm down. Palestinians were quite capable of wanting Hamas-style “resistance” with their hearts but peace talks with their heads, he said.

“The more military operations by Israel either here or in Gaza, the more it will make people go away from wanting agreements,” he said.

“But you should know that even after Israel carried out this operation yesterday, if today it says ‘We want a political solution, let’s reach an agreement,’ it would be completely accepted by the majority of the Palestinian people,” Mr. Salah added.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s spokesman, Mark Regev, on Monday accused Hamas of inflicting suffering upon its fellow Palestinians. In a conference call with journalists he said the group was “holding hostage” ordinary Palestinians in Gaza just as it was a quarter of a million citizens in southern Israel.

But Hamas has in the past proved adept at deflecting such barbs. “Israel and America say no to Hamas. What do you say?” read one Hamas 2006 election banner. The Palestinians gave one answer then. Whether they give the same answer in 2009 or 2010 may depend on how the next few weeks play out.

[Baca]

GERMANY'S FALTERING BANK BAILOUT PROGRAM : The Bottomless Pit - By Beat Balzil, Armin Mahler, Christopher Pauly and Wolfgang Reuter (LATEST UPDATE - 28/12/08)

Beat Balzil, Armin Mahler, Christopher Pauly and Wolfgang Reuter   
23 December 2008, Spiegel Online

The German government whipped its €480 billion bank bailout package through parliament in record time, but now the program has run into trouble. The banks are still fighting for survival, the money market isn't functioning properly, and taxpayers' money is being burned.

Who knows Claudia Hillenherms? Almost no one, and yet, for some time now, she has been one of the most powerful women in Germany.

To reach Ms. Hillenherms, one has to pass through a thick, heavy steel door. The painters have left their paint buckets standing in the stairwell of the historic building that belongs to Germany's central bank, the Bundesbank. Everything there smells new and seems temporary.

Until two months ago, the villa in the Taunusanlage park in Frankfurt was being used as a training site for six central bankers from developing countries. But then they were suddenly forced to move to a different location because the Special Fund for Financial Market Stabilization (Soffin) needed a home.

Now the building serves as the headquarters of Germany's bank bailout program. Soffin has been charged with making €480 billion ($672 billion) available to German financial institutions. Those who want a piece of the pie must deal with Claudia Hillenherms. Hillenherms, an accountant by trade and a specialist in the valuation of companies, is on loan from her employer, publicly-owned regional bank Landesbank Hessen-Thüringen (Helaba). At Helaba, she was responsible for managing the bank's takeover of a savings bank, Frankfurt Sparkasse.

Her new job as head of the financial stability measures is far more complex. In addition to protecting German financial institutions from failure, she has been charged with ensuring that the banks can continue to pursue their central purpose -- injecting money into the economy.

If this doesn't happen, government stimulus programs, no matter how large, will fail, and the foundations of the German economy will begin to crumble.

Hillenherms and Soffin Director Günther Merl, a former chairman of the board at Helaba, have already met dozens of bank representatives at the Frankfurt villa. "On some days, we sign off on a few billion here," says a senior member of the staff at Soffin who, despite the turbulent times, has preserved a modicum of respect for such big numbers.

To date, Soffin has approved government guarantees for €90 billion ($126 billion) in loans. After prolonged negotiations with the European Union, Soffin now plans to release the first equity assistance package, worth €8.2 billion ($11.5 billion), for the German bank Commerzbank.

Soffin has already received requests for at least another €100 billion ($140 billion) in liquidity assistance. Even German carmaker Volkswagen is now lining up for money.

Mounting Criticism

Nevertheless, criticism of Soffin's work is growing by the day. It is not always clear what exactly is meant by Soffin: the agency itself, which is regarded as rigid and bureaucratic, its government overseers, who give it little leeway and are believed to be deeply divided amongst themselves, or even the structure of the entire bailout package. Some consider its rules too harsh, because of the conditions attached to receiving financial assistance, while others see them as far too lax because they do not force banks to seek the government's protection.

The fact is that the banks' situation has hardly improved since the government decided to put up a protective umbrella for the entire banking sector. The €480 billion ($672 billion) package was approved by the government, whipped through the upper and lower houses of the German parliament and enacted -- all in the space of five days.

All German banks can now take advantage of government guarantees to secure liquidity and, if necessary, obtain capital directly from the government and dispose of risky securities as needed. The goal is to reestablish trust among the banks so that they begin lending money to each other again, a system that came to a standstill after the failure of the US investment bank Lehman Brothers. The hope is that if the banks regain liquidity and can refinance themselves at any time, they will resume their normal role of injecting cash into the economy.

The reality looks different. Bankers are loath to accept government protection out of fear of intervention into their business models and salaries. Those who do accept money complain that Soffin is slow to take decisions. Both circumstances reduce the effectiveness of the government's protective shield.

Piecemeal rescue

But what happens if the government's billions are spent and the banks are still in trouble? And what if the economy continues to tank and even large corporations can no longer borrow funds?

The rescue package was originally conceived as a protective shield for the entire industry. The government wanted to back off from its previous case-by-case approach, especially after it had been forced twice to rescue the ailing mortgage lender Hypo Real Estate (HRE), where prosecutors conducted searches of executives' offices and private homes last week.

Although Soffin has now been created, its attempt to bring about a general solution has proven to be a sum of case-by-case solutions -- and a bottomless pit.

HRE is still the most troublesome case. The mortgage bank is requesting new guarantees at a breathtaking pace. At first, the federal government and other financial institutions assembled a €50 billion ($70 billion) packet to provide the necessary liquidity and keep the Munich-based lender afloat.

A short time later, SoFFin was forced to approve an additional €20 billion ($28 billion) bailout. The next €10 billion ($14 billion) followed in early December. "What else is coming?" asks a concerned member of parliament, pointing out that a single institution cannot possibly absorb the bulk of the government rescue package.

HRE's management wants to begin by downsizing to a healthier level by cutting a third of the company's workforce of 1,800 people. Management's next step, if it had its way, would be split the company, with problematic subsidiary Depfa being nationalized and the remainder of HRE getting back to business. But the plan has encountered resistance from politicians who argue that the strategy would only benefit shareholders -- at taxpayers' expense.

Bundesbank President Axel Weber has proposed an alternative solution. To shore up the German bond market, specialty lenders like HRE or Aareal could be made subsidiaries of another bank or merged to form a single bond bank. In both cases, the government would have to reach deeply into the structures of the economy. So far, the government has shied away from taking on a restructuring of the banking industry.

It has also been sharply opposed to nationalizing financial institutions. The government would prefer not to become involved. It could have imposed a certain capital ratio on the banks, thereby forcing the publicly-owned Landesbank regional banks under the Soffin umbrella. It should not have given the banks any choice in the matter. Then it would have been able to force them to merge and develop new business models. Both are overdue, and yet no progress has been made.

A Waste of Taxpayers' Money

Instead, the damaged Landesbanken continue to plod along, frittering away taxpayers' money. HSH Nordbank is a case in point. For weeks now the bank, under new CEO Dirk Jens Nonnenmacher, has had its back to the wall, and it is believed to be facing a loss of up to €2 billion ($2.8 billion) for the year. At the end of November, after lengthy negotiations with Soffin, HSH Nordbank secured a liquidity guarantee for €30 billion ($42 billion).

Despite the government bailout, however, the Hamburg-based institution still has not managed to raise €3 billion ($4.2 billion) in the capital markets with a three-year corporate bond. Officially, the bank claims that the potential investors' books were already closed. In reality, says a Frankfurt banker, it was "the market's fatal vote of no confidence." In the same week, the major French bank BNP Paribas and the Italian bank Intesa Sanpaolo had no problems placing their new bonds -- without government guarantees.

The strike by investors shows that hardly anyone believes that the owners of HSH Nordbank want to or are capable of raising additional equity. Its government owners, Schleswig-Holstein and Hamburg, two financially strapped German states, are in dire straits. Among the other owners, the local savings banks want out completely, and US private investor J.C. Flowers is also proving to be uncooperative.

Deutsche CEO Accused of Stigmatizing Bailout

Insiders expect HSH to be knocking on Soffin's door in January. It is not likely to be the only one. This year's fourth quarter has been disastrous for banks. Even Deutsche Bank was hard-hit. According to estimates by JP Morgan, Deutsche Bank will have to write off an additional €2.3 billion ($3.2 billion), leading to widespread speculation over whether the industry leader will be able to manage without government funds in the long run.

Deutsche Bank CEO Josef Ackermann wants to avoid the walk to Soffin, only a few hundred meters from his corporate headquarters, at all costs. His name has been closely associated -- in good and bad ways -- with the government's rescue package from the beginning.

Ackermann was the first to call for a general bailout for the industry.

But the government is also convinced that Ackermann stigmatized the package when he said, at an internal event, that he would be ashamed to see his bank requesting help from the government.

Finance Minister Peer Steinbrück was livid when he heard the news. Ackermann, he said, had paved the way "for a two-class society in the banking sector: into those that don't need help and those that are at risk of relegation. This is dangerous, because the markets respond to it." A man like Ackermann should have known better.

At last the December 14 economic summit at the Chancellery, Ackermann proposed the idea of what he called a Bad Bank -- a government institution that would buy risky securities from the banks and hold onto them until they matured. In this way Deutsche Bank, too, could shed excessively high-risk securities without having to apply directly for government assistance.

It is already possible to transfer bad loans to Soffin as part of the rescue package. But no one has made use of this option yet, because the toxic loans can only be outsourced for three years, at which point they are transferred back. This restrictive provision led to the failure of talks between Postbank and Soffin. Postbank wanted to get rid of high-risk securities worth €5 billion ($7 billion). If the bank had agreed with Soffin, Deutsche Bank would also have benefited from the government bailout, because it recently became a major shareholder in Postbank.

Approaching Soffin directly would come at a heavy price for Deutsche Bank and its chief executive. Ackermann has stated his position so adamantly that he could hardly hold onto his job if his bank were forced to apply for government bailout funds.

Soffin already has its hands full. Hillenherms, who sees everything from minor exploratory inquiries ("What would it cost us to secure equity capital from you?") to urgent calls for help ("We'll be bankrupt tomorrow") cross her desk, is currently reviewing a preliminary inquiry from Aareal Bank. The publicly traded mortgage lender is not in critical straits but merely wants to recapitalize, says an individual familiar with the situation.

Aareal Bank has not submitted an official application yet, but its options include guarantees as well as equity capital injections from the government. The bank has declined to comment.

Too Slow

Many applicants complain that Soffin is taking far too long to process their requests. It can take weeks before they are even looked at, and applicants say that the decision-making criteria are vague.

The 21 employees at Soffin, most of them on temporary loan from the Bundesbank, see themselves as whipping boys, forced to take responsibility for everything that goes wrong in the bank rescue effort.

Karlheinz Bentele, the former president of a savings bank and a member of the managing board of Soffin, returned to his regular job after only a few weeks. Soffin Director Merl has yet to sign a valid contract, and the names of potential successors are already being mentioned in the industry, including that of former Finance Minister Hans Eichel. The source of the trouble is a tangible dispute over competencies. Even though Merl heads the managing board of Soffin, a steering committee must approve key decisions. The finance ministry and even the chancellery are involved in major cases.

A senior staffer at Soffin complains that the agency operates in a gray zone between business and politics. This is complicated by the fact that even the government's representatives cannot always agree on what the right approach should be.

The system cannot continue in its present form. The weaknesses are all too obvious, including those of the underlying legislation that created the system. As long as old toxic debt can only be outsourced for three years and is capped at €5 billion ($7 billion), a permanent clean-up will be impossible.

The risks continue to hover around the banks. Even senior Soffin representatives are now convinced that the creation of one or more Bad Banks, as Ackermann proposes, is inevitable. Finally, the government will have to clarify when and under what circumstances banks should be nationalized.

Most of all, however, the money market needs to be revitalized. Before the crisis, the banks would lend each other up to €500 billion ($700 billion) every day. This flow of money back and forth between banks during normal times is extremely important for the economic cycle. It ensures that the banks use the capital available to them in an optimal way. This, in turn, benefits corporate customers that require larger loans.

Conversely, if this interbank market no longer functions properly, the banks must stockpile liquidity -- that is, form reserves -- to be able to service all obligations at all times. As a result, they are left with little or no latitude for new business.
Mid-sized companies, in particular, are currently feeling the impact.

A government clearing house could be a possible solution to this problem. Banks would no longer lend money directly to other banks.

Instead, all cash would flow through this central clearing house and would be guaranteed by the government. The Bundesbank has been asked to examine such a measure, and the government plans to discuss it in January.

But what happens if this solution is also ineffective? Or if the banks start lending money to each other again, but not to companies, because they see commercial lending as too risky?

If that happens, the government will face calls to start lending money to companies directly.
[Baca]

TARP This: Paulson's Bailout Plan Riddled With Deception : How a Program To Save The Economy Ended Up Enriching Big Banks - By Danny Schechter (LATEST UPDATE - 28/12/08)

Danny Schechter   
Published on Tuesday 23 December, 2008 by CommonDreams.org

Talk about crazy making. How do we believe anything Hank Paulson says?

First, he needed $700 Billion, and fast, to buy up troubled assets or the skies would fall and we would be pressed to impose martial law. He found an appropriate acronym, TARP, to manage the money with a skeletal staff of 28 headed up by one of his former protégés at Goldman Sachs.

So Far, So Good,

But then he had himself a rethink, realizing that no one has a clue about how to price troubled assets considered practically worthless. So he had to a make a shift, "in the light of new facts," even though Congress never authorized the shift.

So Far, So Good.   

He claimed this showed flexibility and a willingness to respond to new information. Never mind that that information was not new and kind of obvious to anyone paying close attention to the subprime fiasco.  

So Far, So Good

Then Congress pumped a three-page proposal into a four hundred-page package. Once it was 'enhanced' will all kinds of pork and earmarks it was passed. Legislators screamed about the absolute necessity of oversight and transparency; after all, this is taxpayer's money. But then, they took a break to run for re-election without naming anyone to oversee Hank's new TARP or the taxpayer money. There seems to have been an oversight of oversight?

So far, Less Good

Paulson, then changed the playbook and started pumping a few billion here, and a few billion there into the coffers of financial institutions, many with lots of money already to recapitalize banks. The goal, we were told was to get them lending again.

There was a problem, though. Most banks didn't start lending because of fears of the risks to their own survival in the current economic free fall.  

Partly that was because the government was not requiring any concessions except NON-Voting stock which gives it little leverage.  The auto industry was expected to outline a reorganization plan to get the money. The banks had no such requirement.

A New York Times report from London explained:  

"Some analysts said the idea that recapitalizing banks would repair the lending market was flawed from the beginning because it was contradictory. On the one hand, the policy was meant to make banks reduce risk. On the other, it pressured them to lend more which meant taking more risks."

So instead they diverted some of the money to satisfy their internal needs. An Associated Press investigation found:  "Banks that are getting taxpayer bailouts awarded their top executives nearly $1.6 billion in salaries, bonuses, and other benefits last year." Many other banks would not disclose what they did with the money. Many of them have tightened credit, rather than loosened it.

Oops, not so good

"Treasury has bought preferred stock with no control rights," writes former Fed governor Alan Blinder. "...There are no public-purpose quid pro quos, such as a minimal lending requirement. So banks can just sit on the capital, which is what most of them have done, or use it to make acquisitions, as a few have....

So here we are, looking at an all-too-familiar story. The administration that brought you the Iraq war and the Katrina response is locking in another disaster before it leaves town."

Yikes...

"TAMING WILD BEASTS"

Historian Howard James goes further indicting the measures governments have been taking which he calls a "crescendo of ad hoc measures that several governments took throughout the fall: injecting liquidity, purchasing toxic assets, capitalizing banks, and, finally, nationalizing entire banking systems." He's skeptical that they will work.

"The $700 billion bailout announced by the U.S. Department of the Treasury in late September was designed to remove from banks' balance sheets mortgages and other securities that in some way corresponded to real houses. But it is still unclear today how these assets are to be valued or how that valuation might wind up benefiting or hurting their new owners. In the United States and in Europe, the hope is that governments will assume many of the risks inherent in this uncertain valuation -- and tame the wild beasts of the financial jungle through state-backed and state-run banking systems. To some, this is profoundly ironic.  

As Russian President Dmitry Medvedev put it in September, the experience shows that "the move from self-regulating capitalism to financial socialism is only one step." American free-market capitalism was not supposed to look like this.

Recently, I met Princeton Professor James, who was speaking at an elite forum on the economy at the Council of Foreign Relations. I asked if he shared my belief that our financial system is permeated with crime, and that the financial crisis was engineered by banksters and white collar criminals. (This was before the Bernard Madoff revelations.) I expected the panel to be dismissive of such a "crude" suggestion in a room full of finance professionals, but he wasn't, and agreed publically that the problem is fraud problem is serious but that in times of prosperity, exposes are rarely pursued.

He now sees the US now emulating China-which is having a hard time too-with more state intervention. He thinks this is the direction we will be forced to move in and sees Beijing more than Washington as key to solving what is now a global mess.

This thought upsets guardians of the free market like finance expert Peter Schiff, Ron Paul's economic advisor and the man who was laughed at on TV when he warned of the current collapse. I spoke to him recently for  the film I am making on the economic crisis based on my book, Plunder. He thinks the government has to stay out of markets even if that means businesses will collapse.  

SCHIFF: What is happening right now, the credit crunch, the collapse of the real estate stocks, all these companies going bankrupt, this is not the problem. This is actually the solution. This is the consequence of the problem. The problem was that for years we ran this funny economy where we borrowed money to consume.  

SCHECHTER: How could that be the solution? So many people are out of work, people are losing homes?

SCHIFF: Well, we have to rebalance our economy

The clash over macro-economic policy is mirrored in a debate over specific policies. Congress finally found an oversight person in Elizabeth Warren, the Harvard Professor and critic of consumer rip-offs.  She says Paulson is not disclosing enough and just published a report  with tough questions about Paulson's TARP.

Already the banking industry is fighting back, questioning her judgment and implying she is some kind of commie. Hedge Funder Tom Clark derides her concerns but doesn't refute them:

"The Professor doesn't just quibble with this lending practice or that one. She thinks the entire industry is diabolical. Warren apparently believes consumer lenders have some mystical, systematic advantage over consumers, which they see as their duty to exploit at every turn. Or, as she puts it,  ‘Credit products aimed at both middle class and poor families are designed to trick them, trap them, and otherwise pick their pockets.'"

And so, as the Obama Administration is poised to take over, we have radically conflicting ideas of what to do.  Should we help people or banks, Main Street or Wall Street, take new initiatives or recycle old ones, use interventionist government power or put all our eggs in ‘the market rules' basket?

The President-Elect's centrist appointments suggest he is buying into the prevailing Washington-Wall Street consensus that tilts towards the private sector with Wall Streeters as key advisors.

To be fair, the Obama Plan has yet to be spelled out. The Washington Post reports he has expanded it with a massive federal stimulus package and now hopes to create or preserve 3 million jobs over the next two years. He also has said Wall Street needs "adult supervision." Great phrase, but they will need more than that.  Many banks are basically bankrupt; any recovery seems far off.  

The only good news in this bleak picture is that Paulson, the Goldman Sachs miracle worker turned Donald Rumsfeld of the economy, is leaving soon, stage right. Despit his feverish initial demands, however, he just announced that he doesn't need another $350 Billion... at least for now. That was yesterday. Maybe he changed his mind.

That ball has been kicked into Barack's court.   

Have the Bush-Paulson-Bernanke policies worked? Did the economy turn around on their watch or through the trillions spent by the Fed?

Not even close and maybe its time to TARP them all.

So far, not good at all.
[Baca]

Fact Sheet: Financing Assistance to Facilitate the Restructuring of Auto Manufacturers to Attain Financial Viability - By Office of The Press Secretary (LATEST UPDATE - 28/12/08)

Office of The Press Secretary

Sunday, 28 December 2008 00:41

For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary 19 December 2008 Conditioned Loans To The Domestic Auto Industry Will Enable Vital Restructuring, While Protecting The American Taxpayer Today, President Bush announced that the Treasury Department will make loans available from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) to assist the domestic auto industry in becoming financially viable. The terms and conditions of this financing will facilitate the restructuring of our domestic auto industry, prevent disorderly bankruptcies during a time of economic difficulty, and protect the taxpayer by ensuring that only financially viable firms receive assistance. • These auto manufacturers will be provided with $13.4 billion in short-term financing from the TARP. An additional $4 billion would be made available in February, contingent upon drawing down the final tranche of TARP funds. • The firms must use these funds to become financially viable. Taxpayers will not be asked to provide financing for firms that do not become viable. In the event that firms have not attained viability by March 31, 2009, the loan will be called and all funds returned to the Treasury Department. • A firm will only be considered viable if it has a positive net present value, taking into account all current and future costs, and can fully repay the government loan. • The President's preference was not to use TARP funds to assist these firms, but since Congress failed to act, executive branch action is necessary. Terms And Conditions The binding terms and conditions established by the Treasury will mirror those that were supported by a majority of both houses of Congress, including: o Firms must provide warrants for non-voting stock. o Firms must accept limits on executive compensation and eliminate perks such as corporate jets. o Debt owed to the government would be senior to other debts, to the extent permitted by law. o Firms must allow the government to examine their books and records. o Firms must report and the government has the power to block any large transactions (more than $100 million). o Firms must comply with applicable Federal fuel efficiency and emissions requirements. o Firms must not issue new dividends while they owe government debt. The terms and conditions established by Treasury will include additional targets that were the subject of Congressional negotiations but did not come to a vote, including: o Reduce unsecured debt by two-thirds via a debt for equity exchange. o Make one-half of Voluntary Employee Beneficiary Association (VEBA) payments in the form of stock. o Eliminate the jobs bank. o Work rules that are competitive with transplant auto manufacturers by December 31, 2009. o Wages that are competitive with those of transplant auto manufacturers by December 31, 2009. These terms and conditions would be non-binding in the sense that negotiations can deviate from the quantitative targets above, providing that the firm reports the reasons for these deviations and makes the business case that it will achieve long-term viability in spite of the deviations. In addition, the firm will be required to conclude new agreements with its other major stakeholders, including dealers and suppliers, by March 31, 2009. Effects Of A Domestic Auto Industry Failure During this very critical time for the global economy, the impact of a disorderly bankruptcy would be very damaging to our manufacturing base, affecting jobs well beyond the auto industry. The additional job losses and loss from Gross Domestic Product (GDP) would likely postpone our economic recovery considerably. In addition, these effects could multiply and result in additional declines in investment, consumption, and growth, which could worsen the current recession. • The direct costs of American automakers failing and laying off their workers in the near term would result in a more than one-percent reduction in real GDP growth and about 1.1 million workers losing their jobs, including workers from auto suppliers and dealers. Many workers would apply for unemployment benefits, and to the extent that retirees and other workers lost health insurance, apply for Medicaid. These new unemployment claims could cost about $13 billion and would likely add sizeable costs to State Medicaid programs. Additionally, suppliers may not be able to absorb losses from writing off the accounts payable owed by auto manufacturers and may not be able to downsize quickly, resulting in remaining auto companies having supply chains disrupted. These effects on our economy could multiply as a result of the failure of these companies.

[Baca]

"AS WE WELCOME THE NEW YEAR - 2009, WE MUST NEVER, EVER FORGET THE HEROIC STRUGGLES OF THE PALESTINIANS AGAINST FASCIST ISRAELI OCCUPATION - UNTIL TOTAL VICTORY" (LATEST UPDATE - 28/12/08)

The intelligence is not to say everything you know, but you must know everything you say. Hope the day after tomorrow be better.... Helping Ladies across the street Providing childcare. Allowing them a place to rest (permanently) Access to Health care. Construction projects (demolition) Respecting American and British pacifist resisters (such as American Rachel Corrie) And others. And if you are not satisfied, now, with the truth the following pictures are war crimes as defined by the UN, The Hague and the Geneva Convention. Using images of your enemy dead or alive (violation) Human shields (violation) Live Burial Torture (violation) And as a last resort, Execution (violation) These IDF soldiers have faces... I can clearly see them...Cant you? Why are they not being prosecuted? Because it is systematic process that is driven by the government designed to force the people of Palestine into exile so Israel can claim all the land and resources. This where my American tax dollars are going, do you know where your tax dollars are at? TAKE THE TIME TO FIND THE TRUTH. So many lives depend on it I, like so many Americans, am Caucasian, non-Arab, and religious. I can no longer sit back with good conscience and do nothing while my government is supporting the types of terrorist actions that we have condemned Muslim Fundamentalist for. Call your Congressman and Senator, send an email to the White House and demand that our government negotiate FAIRLY with both sides and bring a fair and just solution to Palestine and Israel .

[Baca]

Liquidity Traps versus Inflation Traps - By D.W. MacKenzie (LATEST UPDATE - 28/12/08)

D.W. MacKenzie   
23 December 2008, Mises Institute

The Federal Reserve Bank has now undertaken unprecedented measures intended to "stimulate the economy." The federal funds rate is now set at 0.0 to 0.25%. This move by Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke should be considered alarming for several reasons. First, this interest-rate reduction indicates that Federal Reserve economists are genuinely panicked regarding current economic conditions. Given that Chairman Bernanke and his staff are better informed than even most economists (let alone the public) and capable of differentiating good news from bad, this is cause for concern.

Second, this interest-rate reduction indicates that Chairman Bernanke and his staff are incapable of differentiating between good policy and bad policy. The Federal Reserve is pursuing a policy of inflation out of an erroneous fear of deflation. This is not to say that deflation is itself unlikely, but rather that the consequences of deflation are not what Chairman Bernanke expects.

Chairman Bernanke appears to be following the advice of recent Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman. According to Krugman, we have fallen into the "liquidity trap" as described by economist John Maynard Keynes. There are, however, real differences between what Keynes wrote and what Krugman now advocates. According to Keynes, when the "rate of interest has fallen to a certain level" where "almost everyone prefers holding cash to holding debt which yields so low a rate of interest," central banks can "lose effective control over the interest rate" (Keynes 1936, p. 207).

Keynes's liquidity trap represents a process whereby the public prefers cash to bonds. The public therefore responds to increases in the money supply in a way that neutralizes its effects; in other words, when the Federal Reserve increases the money supply, people increase their cash holdings in direct proportion to that increase.

Recent events indicate that the liquidity trap, as described by Keynes, does not exist. Keynes's theory suggests that in depressed economic conditions interest rates bottom out at some low-but-positive level. The actual reason for this is that people will want to avoid capital losses at some future date when interest rates rise. People therefore refuse to hold bonds at or near a rate of zero.

If this were true, the public would wield veto power over Federal Reserve policy. However, this appears not to be the case. The Federal Reserve has not lost control over short-term rates, even as they approach zero. The Federal Reserve is now looking at depressing long-term rates, and it is not at all clear that they will hit any minimum boundary if or when they drive these rates down. Contrary to what Professor Krugman has asserted, recent experience contradicts Keynes's theory of the liquidity trap.

Professor Krugman has, however, described a somewhat different type of liquidity trap. According to Krugman, increasing the money supply will fail to stimulate the economy in depression conditions. This is the same claim made by Keynes, but Krugman allows for the scenario where the Federal Reserve drives interest rates down to zero. At or near zero-percent interest rates, "some money is now held merely as a store of value, indistinguishable from bonds. And in that case any further increase in the money supply will have no effect; the economy will, in fact, be in the liquidity trap." In contrast to what Keynes wrote, Krugman allows for a situation where the public is indifferent between debt and cash. If short-term debt yields very little or no interest, then holding it generates the same return as ordinary cash or checking deposits.

There are three problems with this analysis.

Krugman has not explained why people would simply hold either cash or short-term debt in any amount produced by the Federal Reserve or other institutions. Krugman notes that the Federal Reserve must commit to holding interest rates low even after the recession ends (and inflation soars) in order for monetary policy to be effective. Here Krugman holds the wrong view of the right issue. The effects of Federal Reserve policy depend upon expectations in the cash/debt-holding public.

Krugman has erred by framing his discussion where the public considers only holding cash or debt and future and current prices. In his theory, the supply of actual consumer goods "drops as manna from heaven, so that consumption in each period is a given." In other words, capital does not exist in his theoretical world. This is an especially strange proposition in a theory that centers on explaining interest rates.

Even if Krugman is correct about the way the public would react to zero-percent interest rates, the fact remains that his theory is far enough from reality to render it irrelevant. Federal Reserve policy directly affects both consumer and business lending. While at this time businesses and banks are being cautious about lending, credit does continue to flow. The artificially low interest rates imposed by the Federal Reserve change the relative return on shorter- and longer-term business investment, as well as the relative return on short- and long-term consumer credit. Krugman merely assumes out of existence the possibility that low interest rates cause intertemporal discoordination. John Maynard Keynes made the exact same mistake in his lesser-known book A Treatise on Money.

Friedrich Hayek discredited Keynes's earlier book by pointing out that Keynes had attempted to explain money, interest rates, and cycles without addressing capital theory. Keynes advanced beyond his earlier book by incorporating his own crude theory of "the marginal efficiency of capital" into his famous General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money. Keynesian theory, despite many faults, has not completely ignored capital. What Professor Krugman has done is to take Keynesian theory back to its capital-free roots. His theory is therefore incapable of addressing potential problems with how the business community will react to Chairman Bernanke's extreme interest-rate policy.

Another problem with Professor Krugman's analysis is that he assumes that prices are "sticky." Krugman more or less admits that if prices adjust freely, his policy of inflation is unnecessary. On the contrary, falling prices will increase purchasing power of money and restore prosperity. By this reasoning, an increase in the money supply will also increase purchasing power of money and restore prosperity.

The idea that prices are "sticky" and do not fall as demand falls should come as great comfort to homeowners. According to Krugman, housing values have not fallen. This is, however, bad news for consumers. The theoretical existence of sticky prices means that they have not actually found bargains during this shopping season. The fact of the matter is that many prices are falling, contrary to Krugman's assumption.

A final problem with Professor Krugman's assessment of our current situation is that he has ignored an important recent change in Federal Reserve policy. As of October 9, the Federal Reserve began paying interest on excess and required reserves. Professor Krugman is quite correct in his recent remarks regarding the buildup of excess reserves in US banks. He is wrong, however, to assume that this is evidence of a "liquidity trap" in the US financial system. Why should US banks go to the bother of loaning out all of their increased reserves to gain interest if the Federal Reserve is already paying them interest on their reserves?

The bottom line with Krugman's analysis is that he believes that current expenditures must be subsidized with negative interest rates if aggregate demand is to increase. This is impossible in his theory because at an interest rate of zero, bonds and money are perfect substitutes, and the public does not trust the Federal Reserve to allow for inflation after this recession ends.

The Federal Reserve has not actually stumbled into either a Keynesian or Krugman-type liquidity trap. The Federal Reserve has actually created an "inflation trap," whereby today's low interest rates have set us on a course of a future inflationary credit boom, which will be followed by either higher interest rates or hyperinflation and a subsequent crisis. Fortunately, banks have not unleashed the massive amount of reserves that now exist in the banking system.

To many economists, the fact that the Fed has loaded banks with reserves without dramatically increasing actual credit is a good thing. But this view overlooks the problems caused by artificially low interest rates, as well as the potential for banks to convert their excess reserves into loans, as banks perceive gain by substituting loan interest for interest paid on reserves by the Fed.

The bottom line is that Professor Krugman has offered exactly the wrong advice. The Federal Reserve should not make a credible commitment to future inflation as a means of stimulating aggregate demand. The Federal Reserve should instead reverse its low-interest-rate policy before it increases the level of discoordination in the economy.
[Baca]

Blindsided by crisis, economists rethink profession along with theories - By Drake Bennett (LATEST UPDATE - 28/12/08)

Drake Bennett   

(FF Editorial: In the past few weeks, I have been relentless and merciless in my criticisms of economists especially Nobel Laureates who creates mathematical models to forecast volatility and prices for derivative products. No less, a bunch of pseudo scientists who got it so wrong on the global financial tsunami. For long they have got away with their nonsensical theories about the market especially the derivative market. It is no consolation that these charlatans are now questioning their very own relevance. The accompanying article should shut up my critics who swallow whatever shit that is unloaded by the so-called experts. This was most evident when an economist, no less than a Nobel Laureate was in Kuala Lumpur to spin his discredited theories. To my critics, God gave you a brain. Use it!)       
 
The deepening global economic downturn has been hard on a lot of people, but it has been hard in a particular way for U.S. economists.

For most people, pain and apprehension have been mixed with amazement at the complexity of what has unfolded: the dense, invisible lattice connecting home prices to insurance companies to job losses to car sales, the inscrutability of the financial instruments that helped spread the poison, the sense that the ratings agencies and regulatory bodies were overmatched by events, the recent wild gyrations of stock markets.


It is hard enough to understand what is happening, and it seems absurd to think we could have seen it coming beforehand. The vast majority of us, after all, are not experts.

But academic economists are. And with very few exceptions, they did not predict the crisis, either. Some warned of a housing bubble, but almost none foresaw the resulting cataclysm. An entire field of experts dedicated to studying the behavior of markets failed to anticipate what may prove to be the biggest economic collapse of our lifetime. And now that we are in the middle of it, many frankly admit that they are not sure how to prevent things from getting worse.

As a result, there is a sense among some economists that as they try to figure out how to fix the economy, they are also trying to fix their own profession.

The discussion has played out in blog posts and opinion pieces, in U.S. congressional testimony, at conferences and in working papers. A field that has increasingly been defined, at least in the public eye, by quirky studies explaining the economics of our everyday lives has turned decisively, in the past couple months, to more traditional economic turf.

And at U.S. economics powerhouses like Harvard, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of Chicago, faculty lunch discussions that once might have centered on theoretical questions and the finer points of Bayesian analysis are now given over to dissecting bailout plans. Long-held ideas - about the stability of the business cycle, the resilience of markets and the power of monetary policy - are being challenged.

"Everyone that I know in economics, and particularly in the worlds of academic finance and academic macroeconomics, is going back to the drawing board," said David Laibson, a Harvard economist. "There are very, very, very few economists who can be proud."

A few suggest, as well, that there are deeper problems in the discipline. U.S. economists are asking aloud whether the field has grown too specialized, too abstract and too divorced from the way real-world economies actually function. They argue that many models used to predict the dynamics of financial markets or national economies have been scrubbed clean, in the interest of theoretical elegance, of the inevitable erraticism of human behavior.

As a result, the analytical tools of the trade offer little help in a crisis and have little to say about the sort of collapses that led to this one.

"You can't just say, 'I have a model for tremors that works great - I just can't explain earthquakes,"' said Kenneth Rogoff, an economist at Harvard who has studied financial crises.

Historically, periods of severe economic distress have shaken up economics and helped drive its evolution. And amid the current crash, there is an urgent search for approaches and models that might better illuminate ways to speed the recovery, forecast future meltdowns and help better describe the unruly flow of money.

The question of how well economists can model crises takes on an even greater importance because of the central role economic experts will play in the U.S. administration of President-elect Barack Obama - not only at the Federal Reserve, the Council of Economic Advisers and the Treasury Department, but in the Economic Recovery Advisory Board, a newly formed body created by Obama and led by the former Fed chairman Paul Volcker.

Obama has a reputation for placing a great deal of stock in expertise and the power of data. For better or worse, the evolving understanding of economic breakdowns will have ample opportunity to test itself against the real thing.
Along with everything else they have done, the financial meltdown and economic slump have spurred unprecedented political attention and participation by economists.

"In my lifetime as an economist I've never seen economists so engaged by what's going on," said Richard Thaler of the University of Chicago. "At the University of Chicago people always talk economics at lunch, but for the last three months they've all been talking about the crisis and the bailout and writing op-eds."

This is something of a change. The topics economists study often have little to do with the average person's economic life. As in almost any academic field, practical relevance sometimes has little to do with judgments about what questions are most interesting and rewarding.

This divergence was exacerbated, many economists say, during the span of almost uninterrupted economic growth that began in the late 1980s, a period when many practical questions in the making of economic policy came to be seen as having been settled. For years, leading economic figures like Lawrence Summers and Alan Greenspan argued that the United States had more or less brought the business cycle to heel.

Partly as a result, many bright young economists turned to questions that were quirkier, or more purely mathematical. To the wider public, the most visible ramification of this was the boom in papers and books about the economics of everyday life. Economists like Steven Levitt of the University of Chicago, Ray Fisman of Columbia, Edward Miguel of the University of California, Berkeley, and Justin Wolfers of the University of Pennsylvania used economics as a forensic tool to examine family dynamics, speed-dating, parking scofflaws, basketball games and the life choices of street criminals.

For those who stayed on more traditional economic turf, however, the trend was toward narrower and more abstract questions. Financial economists set out to figure out why it was that stocks earned more than bonds or to devise better ways of calculating the correlation between the price of a single asset and the price of the market it was part of.

Wolfers, being an economist, describes these intellectually challenging but less policy-relevant questions as a sort of scholarly luxury good. "During good times we all consume more luxuries," he said, "but during a bad economy, it feels to macroeconomists that what we should be doing is stuff to help today."

Some economists have suggested that this focus may account for the failure of so many to see the warning signs of the financial crisis and to predict the size and scope of its fallout.

Others see a broader problem, in that the sort of behavior that has been seen in everyone from home buyers to investment bankers in recent months is hard to fit into economists' analytical tools. The models used by macroeconomists do a poor job of describing the messiness of an actual market in flux.

As a result, economists end up oversimplifying such situations when they model them - or simply avoid studying them at all.

"We have a very restrictive set of language and tools, and we tend to work on the problems that are easily addressed with those tools," said Jeremy Stein, a financial economist at Harvard. "Sometimes that means we focus on silly questions and ignore greater ones."
[Baca]

The Coming Capitalist Consensus - By Walden Bello (LATEST UPDATE - 28/12/08)

Walden Bello
Sunday, 28 December 2008 00:04

Not surprisingly, the swift unraveling of the global economy combined with the ascent to the U.S. presidency of an African-American liberal has left millions anticipating that the world is on the threshold of a new era. Some of President-elect Barack Obama’s new appointees – in particular ex-Treasury Secretary Larry Summers to lead the National Economic Council, New York Federal Reserve Board chief Tim Geithner to head Treasury, and former Dallas Mayor Ron Kirk to serve as trade representative – have certainly elicited some skepticism. But the sense that the old neoliberal formulas are thoroughly discredited have convinced many that the new Democratic leadership in the world’s biggest economy will break with the market fundamentalist policies that have reigned since the early 1980s.

One important question, of course, is how decisive and definitive the break with neoliberalism will be. Other questions, however, go to the heart of capitalism itself. Will government ownership, intervention, and control be exercised simply to stabilize capitalism, after which control will be given back to the corporate elites? Are we going to see a second round of Keynesian capitalism, where the state and corporate elites along with labor work out a partnership based on industrial policy, growth, and high wages – though with a green dimension this time around? Or will we witness the beginnings of fundamental shifts in the ownership and control of the economy in a more popular direction? There are limits to reform in the system of global capitalism, but at no other time in the last half century have those limits seemed more fluid.

President Nicolas Sarkozy of France has already staked out one position. Declaring that “laissez-faire capitalism is dead,” he has created a strategic investment fund of 20 billion euros to promote technological innovation, keep advanced industries in French hands, and save jobs. “The day we don’t build trains, airplanes, automobiles, and ships, what will be left of the French economy?” he recently asked rhetorically . “Memories. I will not make France a simple tourist reserve.” This kind of aggressive industrial policy aimed partly at winning over the country’s traditional white working class can go hand-in-hand with the exclusionary anti-immigrant policies with which the French president has been associated.

Global Social Democracy

A new national Keynesianism along Sarkozyan lines, however, is not the only alternative available to global elites. Given the need for global legitimacy to promote their interests in a world where the balance of power is shifting towards the South, western elites might find more attractive an offshoot of European Social Democracy and New Deal liberalism that one might call “Global Social Democracy” or GSD.

Even before the full unfolding of the financial crisis, partisans of GSD had already been positioning it as alternative to neoliberal globalization in response to the stresses and strains being provoked by the latter. One personality associated with it is British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who led the European response to the financial meltdown via the partial nationalization of the banks. Widely regarded as the godfather of the “Make Poverty History” campaign in the United Kingdom, Brown, while he was still the British chancellor, proposed what he called an “alliance capitalism” between market and state institutions that would reproduce at the global stage what he said Franklin Roosevelt did for the national economy: “securing the benefits of the market while taming its excesses.” This must be a system, continued Brown, that “captures the full benefits of global markets and capital flows, minimizes the risk of disruption, maximizes opportunity for all, and lifts up the most vulnerable – in short, the restoration in the international economy of public purpose and high ideals.”

Joining Brown in articulating the Global Social Democratic discourse has been a diverse group consisting of, among others, the economist Jeffrey Sachs, George Soros, former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, the sociologist David Held, Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz, and even Bill Gates. There are, of course, differences of nuance in the positions of these people, but the thrust of their perspectives is the same: to bring about a reformed social order and a reinvigorated ideological consensus for global capitalism.

Among the key propositions advanced by partisans of GSD are the following:

• Globalization is essentially beneficial for the world; the neoliberals have simply botched the job of managing it and selling it to the public;

• It is urgent to save globalization from the neoliberals because globalization is reversible and may, in fact, already be in the process of being reversed;

• Growth and equity may come into conflict, in which case one must prioritize equity;

• Free trade may not, in fact, be beneficial in the long run and may leave the majority poor, so it is important for trade arrangements to be subject to social and environmental conditions;

• Unilateralism must be avoided while fundamental reform of the multilateral institutions and agreements must be undertaken – a process that might involve dumping or neutralizing some of them, like the WTO’s Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights Agreement (TRIPs);

• Global social integration, or reducing inequalities both within and across countries, must accompany global market integration;

• The global debt of developing countries must be cancelled or radically reduced, so the resulting savings can be used to stimulate the local economy, thus contributing to global reflation;

• Poverty and environmental degradation are so severe that a massive aid program or “Marshall Plan” from the North to the South must be mounted within the framework of the “Millennium Development Goals”;

• A “Second Green Revolution” must be put into motion, especially in Africa, through the widespread adoption of genetically engineered seeds.

• Huge investments must be devoted to push the global economy along more environmentally sustainable paths, with government taking a leading role (“Green Keynesianism” or “Green Capitalism”);

• Military action to solve problems must be deemphasized in favor of diplomacy and “soft power,” although humanitarian military intervention in situations involving genocide must be undertaken.

The Limits of Global Social Democracy

Global Social Democracy has not received much critical attention, perhaps because many progressives are still fighting the last war, that is, against neoliberalism. A critique is urgent, and not only because GSD is neoliberalism’s most likely successor. More important, although GSD has some positive elements, it has, like the old Social Democratic Keynesian paradigm, a number of problematic features.

A critique might begin by highlighting problems with four central elements in the GSD perspective.

First, GSD shares neoliberalism’s bias for globalization, differentiating itself mainly by promising to promote globalization better than the neoliberals. This amounts to saying, however, that simply by adding the dimension of “global social integration,” an inherently socially and ecologically destructive and disruptive process can be made palatable and acceptable. GSD assumes that people really want to be part of a functionally integrated global economy where the barriers between the national and the international have disappeared. But would they not in fact prefer to be part of economies that are subject to local control and are buffered from the vagaries of the international economy? Indeed, today’s swift downward trajectory of interconnected economies underscores the validity of one of anti-globalization movement’s key criticisms of the globalization process..

Second, GSD shares neoliberalism’s preference for the market as the principal mechanism for production, distribution, and consumption, differentiating itself mainly by advocating state action to address market failures. The kind of globalization the world needs, according to Jeffrey Sachs in The End of Poverty, would entail “harnessing…the remarkable power of trade and investment while acknowledging and addressing limitations through compensatory collective action.” This is very different from saying that the citizenry and civil society must make the key economic decisions and the market, like the state bureaucracy, is only one mechanism of implementation of democratic decision-making.

Third, GSD is a technocratic project, with experts hatching and pushing reforms on society from above, instead of being a participatory project where initiatives percolate from the ground up.

Fourth, GSD, while critical of neoliberalism, accepts the framework of monopoly capitalism, which rests fundamentally on deriving profit from the exploitative extraction of surplus value from labor, is driven from crisis to crisis by inherent tendencies toward overproduction, and tends to push the environment to its limits in its search for profitability. Like traditional Keynesianism in the national arena, GSD seeks in the global arena a new class compromise that is accompanied by new methods to contain or minimize capitalism’s tendency toward crisis. Just as the old Social Democracy and the New Deal stabilized national capitalism, the historical function of Global Social Democracy is to iron out the contradictions of contemporary global capitalism and to relegitimize it after the crisis and chaos left by neoliberalism. GSD is, at root, about social management.

Obama has a talent for rhetorically bridging different political discourses. He is also a “blank slate” when it comes to economics. Like FDR, he is not bound to the formulas of the ancien regime. He is a pragmatist whose key criterion is success at social management. As such, he is uniquely positioned to lead this ambitious reformist enterprise.

Reveille for Progressives

While progressives were engaged in full-scale war against neoliberalism, reformist thinking was percolating in critical establishment circles. This thinking is now about to become policy, and progressives must work double time to engage it. It is not just a matter of moving from criticism to prescription. The challenge is to overcome the limits to the progressive political imagination imposed by the aggressiveness of the neoliberal challenge in the 1980s combined with the collapse of the bureaucratic socialist regimes in the early 1990s. Progressives should boldly aspire once again to paradigms of social organization that unabashedly aim for equality and participatory democratic control of both the national economy and the global economy as prerequisites for collective and individual liberation.

Like the old post-war Keynesian regime, Global Social Democracy is about social management. In contrast, the progressive perspective is about social liberation.

Walden Bello is a columnist for Foreign Policy In Focus, a senior analyst at the Bangkok-based Focus on the Global South, president of the Freedom from Debt Coalition, and a professor of sociology at the University of the Philippines
[Baca]

Japan Should Scrap U.S. Debt, Dollar May Plummet, Mikuni Says - Bloomberg (LATEST UPDATE - 26/12/08)

By Stanley White and Shigeki Nozawa   

December 24, 2008 Bloomberg

(FF Editorial: In the article “The Real Significance of The Fed’s Zero-Interest-Rate Policy…” Matthias Chang warned that the US will not be able to service its interest payments, what more its principal debts, which are running in the trillions. The US is bankrupt, totally bankrupt – a basket case, a banana republic. It is in fact very much like a third world country that may have to beg for “debt forgiveness”. The article below is a wake-up call to the harsh reality of the financial fiasco that has visited the US. Future Fast-Forward is the first to recognize this reality. It has now been corroborated independently. Anymore debates on this issue?)  

Japan should write-off its holdings of Treasuries because the U.S. government will struggle to finance increasing debt levels needed to dig the economy out of recession, said Akio Mikuni, president of credit ratings agency Mikuni & Co. (Emphasis added)

The dollar may lose as much as 40 percent of its value to 50 yen or 60 yen from the current spot rate of 90.40 today in Tokyo unless Japan takes “drastic measures” to help bail out the U.S. economy, Mikuni said. Treasury yields, which are near record lows, may fall further without debt relief, making it difficult for the U.S. to borrow elsewhere, Mikuni said. (Emphasis added)

“It’s difficult for the U.S. to borrow its way out of this problem,” Mikuni, 69, said in an interview with Bloomberg Television broadcast today. “Japan can help by extending debt cancellations.”  (Emphasis added)

The U.S. budget deficit may swell to at least $1 trillion this fiscal year as policy makers flood the country with $8.5 trillion through 23 different programs to combat the worst recession since the Great Depression. Japan is the world’s second-biggest foreign holder of Treasuries after China.

The U.S. government needs to spend on infrastructure to maintain job creation as it will take a long time for banks to recover from $1 trillion in credit-market losses worldwide, Mikuni said. The U.S. also needs to launch public works projects as the Federal Reserve’s interest rate cut to a range of zero to 0.25 percent on Dec. 16. won’t stimulate consumer spending because households are paying down debt, he said.

U.S. President-elect Barack Obama wants to create 3 million jobs over the next two years, more than the 2.5 million jobs originally planned, an aide said on Dec. 20. Obama takes office on Jan. 20.

Marshall Plan

Japan should also invest in U.S. roads and bridges to support personal spending and secure demand for its goods as a global recession crimps trade, Mikuni said.

Japan’s exports fell 26.7 percent in November from a year earlier, the Finance Ministry said on Dec. 22. That was the biggest decline on record as shipments of cars and electronics collapsed.

Combining debt waivers with infrastructure spending would be similar to the Marshall Plan that helped Europe rebuild after the destruction of World War II, Mikuni said.

“U.S. households simply won’t have the same access to credit that they’ve enjoyed in the past,” he said. “Their demand for all products, including imports, will suffer unless something is done.”

The plan was named after George Marshall, the U.S. secretary of state at the time, and provided more than $13 billion in grants and loans to European countries to support their import of U.S. goods and the rebuilding of their industries

Currency Reserves

The Japanese government could use a new Marshall Plan as a chance to shrink its $976.9 billion in foreign-exchange reserves, the world’s second-largest after China’s, and help reduce global economic imbalances, Mikuni said.

The amount of foreign assets held by the Japanese government and the private sector total around $7 trillion, Mikuni said.

Japan will also have to accept that a stronger yen is good for the country in order to reduce excessive trade surpluses and deficits, he said. The yen has appreciated 23 percent versus the dollar this year, the most since 1987, as the credit crisis prompted investors to flee riskier assets and repay loans in the Japanese currency.

“Japan’s economic model has been dependent on external demand since the Meiji Period” that began in 1868, Mikuni said. “The model where the U.S. relies on overseas borrowing to fuel its property market is over. A strong yen will spur Japanese domestic spending and reduce import prices, thereby increasing purchasing power.”
[Baca]

Mengatasi stigma terhadap ketagihan opioid

STIGMA sosial atau tanggapan negatif masyarakat ialah satu komponen penting dalam usaha merawat ketagihan opioid.

Sama seperti kemudahan dan kemampuan mendapatkan rawatan, tanggapan negatif juga memberikan kesan ketara yang boleh menentukan sama ada seseorang individu akan keluar daripada kepompongnya untuk mendapatkan rawatan.

Tanggapan negatif yang dimaksudkan bukan setakat ejekan atau panggilan nama, ia turut membabitkan tingkah laku bukan berbentuk lisan, seperti mengelakkan, mengasingkan atau menolak kehadiran individu atau kumpulan penagih.

Walaupun berbentuk tidak ketara, stigma mempengaruhi masyarakat. Apabila dilihat dengan secara positif, tanggapan seperti ini mungkin menghalang kelakuan yang tidak diingini, memastikan orang ramai mengelakkan diri daripada melakukan aktiviti yang tidak diterima dalam masyarakat.

Bagaimanapun, dalam sesetengah kes, tanggapan negatif memberi kesan sebaliknya dan menyebabkan orang yang tidak diterima masyarakat untuk terus terjerumus dalam situasi yang tidak sihat dan berbahaya.

Tanggapan negatif mungkin berkaitan dengan kumpulan berbeza, bagi individu yang bergantung kepada opioid, kebimbangan dan rasa malu terhadap reaksi ahli keluarga, rakan dan masyarakat boleh menyebabkan mereka tidak mendapatkan rawatan sedangkan usaha untuk menyembunyikan ketagihan mereka hanya memburukkan lagi keadaan.

Kebimbangan dipandang serong oleh masyarakat merupakan faktor pendorong utama merahsiakan masalah mereka kerana penagih amat sukar untuk mengakui masalah tersebut, khususnya kepada orang tersayang.

Namun, untuk membolehkan pemulihan bermula, penagih perlu mengakui dirinya mengalami masalah ketagihan dan perlu mendapatkan bantuan.

* Mengapa tanggapan negatif wujud?

Istilah yang mempunyai unsur negatif seperti ‘kaki ganja’ adalah nama yang kita sering dengar apabila menggambarkan seseorang yang ketagih opioid.

Malah istilah ‘penagih’ juga memberikan tanggapan kurang baik kerana digunakan dalam nada negatif.

Tanggapan buruk terhadap sekumpulan individu berlaku apabila keadaan dan cabaran yang dihadapi sesuatu kumpulan tidak difahami.

Dalam kes individu yang bergantung pada opioid, orang ramai mempunyai tanggapan salah bahawa mereka lemah, tidak mempunyai perwatakan yang kuat atau tidak bertanggungjawab semata-mata.

Perkara yang kurang difahami umum ialah ketagihan opioid ialah satu masalah perubatan, iaitu penyakit yang menjejaskan fungsi otak individu.

* Ketagihan opioid satu penyakit?

Penggunaan opioid memberikan perasaan gembira melampau yang tidak berasas atau euforia yang ketara kerana ia mencetus pengeluaran dopamin di dalam otak.

Bahan yang sama dibebaskan apabila kita melakukan sesuatu aktiviti yang menyeronokkan tetapi kehebatan euforia yang dicetus oleh opioid jauh mengatasi perasaan gembira biasa.

Dengan penggunaan berpanjangan, otak menagih perasaan di awang-awang yang hanya boleh dicapai apabila mengambil opioid.

* Mengurangkan tanggapan negatif masyarakat

Malaysia terkenal kerana tindakan serius menentang penyalahgunaan dadah, dan hukuman berat dikenakan kerana memiliki dadah.

Dalam usaha mencegah penyalahgunaan dadah yang semakin berleluasa di kalangan penduduk, imej negatif penagihan dadah dipaparkan, pada asasnya dengan menggunakan tanggapan negatif sebagai cara untuk menghalang orang lain daripada menagih dadah.

Pendekatan ini dikukuhkan lagi dengan tanggapan negatif masyarakat terhadap individu yang mengalami ketagihan dan kebergantungan kepada dadah.

Namun begitu, gambaran yang dipaparkan kini semakin baik. Selain menunjukkan kesengsaraan seseorang yang mengalami ketagihan, turut ditunjukkan adalah imej kehilangan yang dialami seseorang, seperti kesihatan dan keluarga mereka, yang jelas memperlihatkan kesannya yang tidak dijangka atau diharapkan penagih.

Gambaran ini menyemai idea bahawa individu yang mengalami masalah ketagihan bukannya seseorang yang lemah atau menagih dengan rela hati, sebaliknya mereka juga mangsa.

Usaha ini merupakan satu langkah kecil untuk mengatasi tanggapan negatif terhadap ketagihan dan kebergantungan kepada dadah tetapi seperti semua usaha lain, ini hanyalah langkah permulaan.

Siri iklan tersebut dengan sendirinya tidak dapat menepis tanggapan negatif yang telah wujud berdekad-dekad lamanya, justeru pendidikan memainkan peranan penting untuk membetulkan dan mengurangkan tanggapan negatif dan diskriminasi.

Lebih penting lagi, perubahan persepsi boleh membawa manfaat yang ternyata tidak dapat dicapai oleh undang-undang.

* Merawat masalah ketagihan

Ramai yang mungkin terkejut mengetahui bahawa ketagihan dadah ialah masalah perubatan yang boleh dirawat dengan selamat dan berkesan.

Satu pilihan rawatan yang dikenali sebagai terapi penggantian dadah (DST) membolehkan individu dirawat dengan ubat untuk mengurangkan keinginan terhadap dadah, tetapi tanpa euforia yang dikaitkan dengan penggunaan dadah sebenar.

Dengan cara ini, kebergantungan otak kepada kesan dadah akan berkurangan secara beransur-ansur sehinggalah akhirnya individu berkenaan mampu menjauhkan diri sepenuhnya daripada dadah.

Rencana ini disumbangkan oleh Persatuan Psikiatri Malaysia (MPA) sebagai menyokong kempen Jiwa Baru; satu inisiatif pendidikan awam bagi merawat ketagihan opioid.

[Baca]

Kehamilan terancang kesihatan reproduktif

Kehamilan terancang kesihatan reproduktif

Keluarga dapat merancang bilangan dan menetukan jarak kelahiran anak dengan mengguna pencegah kehamilan.

PENCEGAH kehamilan atau kontrasepsi ialah satu proses menghalang persenyawaan atau mencegah atau memperlambatkan percantuman sperma dan telur. Kontrasepsi kini semakin menjadi trend masyarakat untuk merancang keluarga. Ia bukan sahaja memberi kebaikan kepada keluarga dan komuniti untuk membina kesihatan reproduktif.

Kesihatan reproduktif adalah keadaan sihat dari segi fizikal, mental dan sosial dan bukan hanya kerana tiada penyakit dalam semua perkara yang berkaitan dengan sistem reproduktif, fungsi dan prosesnya.

Malaysia kini mempunyai seramai 14.05 juta penduduk wanita di mana 7.59 juta terdiri daripada mereka yang berumur 15 hingga 49 tahun dan sepertiga jumlah penduduk Malaysia berumur 10 hingga 24 tahun.

Dalam hal ini, perancang keluarga penting kerana dapat menyelamatkan kira-kira 175,000 wanita setiap tahun, mengurangkan sebanyak 2.7 juta kematian bayi, mengurangkan kematian 1.8 juta kanak-kanak di bawah umur lima tahun, serta satu pertiga daripada kematian yang berkaitan kehamilan dan kelahiran dapat dielakkan. Namun, masyarakat tidak boleh memandang negatif tentang penggunaan kontrasepsi.

Walaupun ia dapat mengurangkan gejala sosial komuniti namun ia sebenarnya memberi kesan positif terhadap pembangunan keluarga. Pencegah kehamilan dapat memberi kebaikan kepada wanita, pasangan, anak-anak dan komuniti.

Jika anda tidak menggunakan apa-apa agen atau alat bagi tujuan berkenaan, adakah anda menimbangkan untuk menggunakannya selepas ini?

Sudah tentu, penggunaan kontraseptif menjanjikan keputusan yang lebih baik jika dibandingkan dengan pasangan yang tidak mengamalkan sebarang kaedah.

Menurut Pakar Perunding Perbidanan dan Sakit Puan, Pusat Perubatan Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), Profesor Dr. Harlina Halizah Siraj, kehamilan yang diingini dapat membina keluarga serta komuniti yang sejahtera.

“Sekarang terdapat pelbagai pilihan pencegah kehamilan dan digunakan mengikut kesesuaian serta pilihan wanita,” katanya dalam sidang media anjuran Weber Shandwick di Wisma LYL, Petaling Jaya, Selangor baru-baru ini.

Tambahnya, pemilihan kaedah pencegah kehamilan yang terbaik bergantung kepada beberapa faktor seperti kepercayaan, tahap kesihatan wanita, umur wanita, kekerapan hubungan seks dan kehendak pasangan suami isteri untuk mendapatkan anak.

“Ia mungkin berubah dari semasa ke semasa sama ada mengikut kesesuaian cara hidup pasangan suami isteri, keberkesanan kaedah, ciri keselamatan dan kemampuan untuk mengamalkan kaedah tersebut.

Namun, apa yang penting, penggunaannya harus betul (seperti dalam arahan penggunaan) dan konsisten,” jelasnya.

Bagi tujuan ini juga, mana-mana pasangan suami isteri yang ingin merancang kelahiran anak dan mencegah kehamilan boleh mendapatkan khidmat tersebut dengan berjumpa doktor, ahli farmasi dan jururawat di hospital dan klinik kerajaan ataupun swasta.

Dr. Harlina memberitahu, keadaan keluarga masyarakat hari ini juga mempengaruhi trend penggunaan pencegah kehamilan.

“ Keadaan keluarga masa kini terdiri daripada pelbagai latar belakang. Kebanyakan wanita dan lelaki hari ini berpendidikan tinggi, lewat kahwin dan mempunyai saiz keluarga yang kecil. Di samping itu, peningkatan penceraian keluarga serta poligami juga berlaku selain daripada aktiviti seksual remaja yang semakin meningkat,” tambahnya.

Sementara itu, pencegah kehamilan juga dapat membendung masalah pembuangan bayi yang semakin menular di kalangan masyarakat.

“Kandungan yang tidak diingini menjadi faktor pembuangan bayi. Oleh itu, kehamilan perlu dirancang dan diingini. Maka pasangan akan merancang dengan baik sehingga tempoh kelahiran kelak,” jelasnya.

Selain daripada kaedah lazim untuk mengelak kehamilan seperti mengelakkan daripada melakukan persetubuhan, azal (di mana, suami mencabut zakar dari faraj sebelum pengeluaran air mani (ejakulasi). Kaedah ini dikatakan diamalkan sejak zaman dahulu kala lagi), kaedah semula jadi (pasangan suami isteri yang memilih kaedah ini harus memastikan tempoh kesuburan wanita dan kondom, terdapat banyak lagi pencegah kehamilan yang lebih efektif dan mudah.

Dr. Harlina memberitahu, pencegah kehamilan yang ideal ialah yang selamat, efektif, yang dapat diterima masyarakat, tidak mahal, mudah melindungi daripada masalah kesihatan yang lain seperti kanser ginekologi.

“Antara yang terbaru tentang pencegahan kehamilan ialah kontrasepsi terkini dapat membangunkan keturunan baru, diperluaskan secara lisan, pengenalan pilihan dan kajian tentang hormon lelaki dan pencegah kehamilan,” jelasnya.

Secara lazimnya, keluarga akan lebih biasa dengan penggunaan pil pencegah kehamilan atau Combined Oral Contraceptive Pills (COCs)

Ia merupakan kombinasi estrogen yang terdiri daripada ethinyl estradiol (EE) dan estradiol (E2).

Pil-pil mengandungi hormon-hormon estrogen dan progestin atau mengandungi hanya hormon progestin.

Malah, pil kombinasi hormon dikatakan dapat mencegah penyakit inflamasi pelvik dan kanser ovari dan endometrial.

Pil jenis ini selamat bagi kebanyakan wanita kecuali wanita yang merokok atau yang mempunyai sejarah keluarga yang berpenyakit jantung

“Terbaru dan masih dalam kajian ialah NOMAC-E2 iaitu estrogen semulajadi yang pertama mengandungi COC. Ia merupakan inovasi pertama dalam kandungan hormon sejak pengenalan pil pencegah kehamilan sejak tahun 60-an lagi,” jelasnya.

Terdapat juga pil perancang yang mudah iaitu lanjutan dos COCs yang kebiasaannya digunakan ketika menunaikan haji.

“Ia digunakan dalam tempoh tiga bulan dan berfungsi dalam purata 91 hari. Cara pengambilan, aktif pil (warna merah samar) akan diambil sembilan hari untuk 84 hari, diikuti tujuh hari untuk pil berwarna putih dan selebihnya menghabiskan pil yang tidak aktif.

Kitaran haid akan berlaku setiap tiga bulan iaitu secara puratanya, empat kali setahun,” jelasnya.

Dr. Harlina menambah, selain pengambilan pil, ramai wanita yang memilih saluran lain.

“Ini dikatakan lebih selamat kerana ia tidak melalui sistem badan dan hati. Kaedah seperti suntikan, tampal, IUCD, gelang faraj, implan dan pil perancang lelaki. Pengambilannya bergantung kepada pilihan keluarga,” jelasnya.

Kesimpulannya, pembangunan baru teknologi pencegah kehamilan masing diteruskan untuk membina komuniti dunia yang sihat dan sejahtera.

“Lebih langkah yang lebih efektif diperlukan untuk mendidik golongan wanita, suami dan keluarga mereka tentang kesedaran serta kepentingan pencegah kehamilan,” jelasnya.

Alternatif Pencegah Kehamilan

Gabungan suntikan dan hormon pencegah kehamilan.

* Dilakukan setiap bulan pada hari ke-28 hingga 30 hari.

* Mengandungi lima miligram estradiol cypionate dan 25 miligram medroxyprogesterone acetate

* Jika sesuai untuk wanita, seseorang itu kurang hadir haid atau tidak mengalaminya langsung.

Jenis tampalan iaitu tompok transdermal

* Ia merupakan kombinasi estrogen dan progestin yang memberi tindak balas terhadap kulit secara perlahan.

* Kaedah ini belum lagi digunakan di Malaysia.

* Cara ini lebih mudah dan dianggap sebahagian daripada kulit (bagi golongan Islam yang ingin mandi hadas besar).

* Penggunaan secara mingguan iaitu untuk tempoh tiga minggu dan satu minggu lagi tampalan dibuka

* Tidak efektif untuk wanita yang melebihi berat 90 kilogram

Gelang faraj

* Inovasi pencegah kehamilan ini semakin popular dan lebih daripada sejuta wanita menggunakannya di Eropah.

* Wanita akan memasukkan ke dalam faraj sendiri ia mudah digunakan kerana boleh digunakan sekali sebulan.

* Mengandungi tahap kombinasi hormon pencegah kehamilan yang rendah.

* Bagi wanita yang ingin merancang keluarga, kaedah ini mempunyai tahap kepercayaan yang tinggi.

* Gelang faraj juga merupakan kawalan kitaran haid yang cemerlang.

Kebaikan penggunaan gelang faraj

* Ia mudah, selesa dan, ringkas dan selamat.

* Posisi yang tepat bukan menjadi perkara yang penting untuk memastikan dia lebih efektif.

* Gelang tersebut merupakan rahsia dan tiada sesiapa yang mengetahui seorang wanita akan menggunakannya dan lelaki juga tidak perasan atau merasainya ketika melakukan hubungan seks.

l Kaedah ini juga tidak memerlukan khidmat nasihat doktor.

l Ia juga boleh digunakan secara tetap atau dalam tempoh yang pendek

l Ketika melakukan seks, wanita tidak perlu berasa takut dan boleh melakukannya secara spontan.

Namun, dalam ada itu terdapat kesan buruk akibat penggunaan gelang faraj antaranya sakit kepala, berat badan bertambah atau sebaliknya, loya, perubahan perasaan, lelehan faraj dan jangkitan faraj.

Antara penyebab kenapa penggunaan gelang faraj kurang berkesan ialah wanita menggunakannya lebih tiga minggu, ia berada di luar faraj (tidak berada tepat di rahim) sebelum menggunakannya, gelang faraj terdedah dengan cahaya matahari dan suhu yang tinggi

Implan

* Implan merupakan hormon progestin sintetik terdiri daripada enam kapsul kecil yang fleksibel (sebesar batang mancis).

* Terkini wanita hanya menggunakan dua kapsul kecil.

* Kapsul-kapsul ini ditanam di bawah kulit lengan bahagian atas.

* Ia boleh mencegah kehamilan secara berkesan selama lima tahun.

* Bagi wanita yang memilih kaedah ini, dianggarkan sejumlah 0.1 peratus (1 dalam 1,000) akan mengalami kehamilan yang tidak dirancang dalam tahun yang pertama.

Intrauterine Contraceptive Devices (IUCD)

* Alat anjal berbentuk ‘T' ini dimasukkan ke dalam rahim oleh doktor bagi mengganggu pergerakan sperma dalam ruangan uterin.

Hormon kontraseptif lelaki (MHC)

* Masih dalam tempoh percubaan.

* MHC digunakan untuk menghalang pembentukan sperma dan kaedah ini amat sukar kerana ia boleh menghilangkan sifat kelakian.

* Sebagai tambahan, lelaki perlu mengambil hormon lain untuk mengekalkan sifat lelaki

* MHC akan diambil melalui suntikan sekali setiap lapan minggu.

[Baca]

Kuasa Allah tiada tandingan makhluk

Kuasa Allah tiada tandingan makhluk

Al-MARAGHI berkata: "Perbincangan yang lalu tentang dakwah Nabi Muhammad SAW terhadap kaum Musyrikin dan Ahli Kitab. Malangnya golongan Musyrikin menentang Baginda lantaran perilakunya sebagai manusia yang makan dan berjalan ke pasar. Keingkaran yang ditunjukkan oleh mereka turut berlaku terhadap para Nabi yang sebelumnya. Cuma berbeza sedikit, kerana golongan Ahli Kitab menunjukkan sikap mengingkari Nabi yang bukan datang daripada kalangan Bani Israel .

Justeru, turunnya ayat di atas bagi menghiburkan Nabi Muhammad SAW yang sedang menghadapi penderhakaan dan kesombongan mereka. Di samping itu juga, untuk mengingatkan Baginda SAW bahawa Allah SWT sahaja Yang Maha Berkuasa memberi pertolongan kepada Baginda SAW dan meninggalkan agama-Nya.

Dalam situasi ini, seolah-olah Allah SWT berfirman kepada Baginda: "Seandainya golongan penderhaka itu menolak ajakan kamu, tidak mahu tunduk kepada kebenaran, manakala kaum Musyrikin pula masih berkelakuan bodoh (jahil), sementara Ahli Kitab dengan sifat takburnya, wajarlah kamu memohon perlindungan daripada Allah SWT, berdoa, menyatakan pujian, sentiasa mengingati bahawa segala urusan berada ditangan-Nya. Sesungguhnya Allah SWT berkuasa melakukan apa sahaja yang dikehendaki-Nya.

Sebab Nuzul Surah Ali Imran: 26

Al-Wahidi meriwayatkan daripada Ibnu Abbas dan Anas Ibnu Malik bahawa sewaktu Rasulullah SAW menakluk kota Mekah, Baginda menjanjikan kerajaan Parsi dan Romawi akan mereka kuasai. (Mendengarkan janji ini), golongan munafik berkata: "Mustahil! Mustahil! Bagaimana Baginda boleh menguasai kerajaan Rom dan Parsi, kerana mereka memiliki kekuasaan dan kelengkapan yang banyak. Adakah Nabi Muhammad SAW masih berasa tidak cukup dengan kejayaan menguasai Mekah dan Madinah, dan mahu ditambah lagi dengan menakluk Parsi dan Romawi?" Sebagai menjawab ejekan mereka itu, Allah SWT menurunkan ayat ini.

Iktibar dan fiqh ayat:

Ibnu Kathir berkata: "Ayat ini menyuruh Muhammad SAW untuk membesarkan Tuhan-Nya, bersyukur dan berserah kepada-Nya. Ayat ini sebagai satu peringatan dan petunjuk supaya bersyukur atas nikmat Allah SWT kepada Rasul-Nya dan umat ini kerana Allah SWT telah menukar keNabian kepada Nabi berbangsa Arab dan menjadikannya Rasulullah SAW kepada manusia dan jin serta dikurniakan banyak keistimewaan yang tidak dikurniakan kepada nabi sebelumnya.

Al-Maraghi berkata: "Sesungguhnya kemuliaan dan kehinaan mempunyai pengaruhnya masing-masing. Bagi golongan yang mulia, mereka mempunyai pengaruh, memiliki sahabat handai yang ramai, segala kebesaran atau ilmu yang dimilikinya dapat memberi kesan terhadap jiwa orang lain. Dalam pada itu, rezekinya banyak mencurah, dan bersikap dermawan kepada orang lain."

Ibnu Abbas menafsirkan al-Mulk iaitu kekuasaan ialah al-Nubuwah atau keNabian.

Hamka berkata: "Maka di dalam rangka kekuasaan Allah SWT, dicabutlah nikmat kekuasaan itu daripada Bani Israel. Allah SWT Maha Berkuasa mewujudkan Dunia Baru, yang membuatkan revolusi dalam alam pemikiran manusia dengan kedatangan Nabi Muhammad SAW yang mulia timbul dari suatu daerah tandus dan gersang di padang pasir, di lembah yang tiada tumbuh-tumbuhan."

Seorang pujangga Inggeris yang terkenal, Thomas Carlyle berkata: "Dengan berkat ajaran Nabi Muhammad SAW dan kedatangannya, maka padang pasir yang kering berubah menjadi subur yang membakar susunan masyarakat lama, dari Barat sampai ke Cordova, Timur sampai ke Delhi. Dia telah mendirikan pusat-pusat kebudayaan dan peradaban di Damsyik, Baghdad, Kaherah, Samarkand, Delhi sampai ke pulau-pulau daerah Khatulistiwa."

Hamka berkata: "Adapun ulama-ulama yang lemah jiwanya, otaknya hanya penuh dengan ilmu-ilmu agama inilah yang kerap kali terjual dan tergadai ke dalam istana raja-raja dan pembesar-pembesar tertinggi. Kalau ada ulama sebegini pembesar-pembesar itu berasa lega berbuat maksiat dalam negara, menindas rakyat, menghisap darah dan mengganggu rumah tangga orang lain. Ini berlaku kerana ulama yang seharusnya menegur perihal pembesar sudah tiada lagi. Mulut-mulut mereka telah disumbat dengan segala macam kemewahan dunia yang sementara."

Mohamad Quraish Shihab berkata: "Dengan menyebut nama Allah SWT, yang lafaz-Nya menyiratkan makna ketaatan dan ibadah hanya wajar diarahkan kepada-Nya semata, pengucap doa ini diharapkan dapat meraih kekhusyukan serta menyandangkan segala sifat terpuji kepada Allah SWT dan menyucikan-Nya daripada segala sifat tercela. Dengan menyeru Malik al-Mulk diharapkan dapat tercermin kekuasaan dan kebesaran Allah SWT, serta kelemahan seluruh makhluk di hadapan-Nya."

Penulis berpendapat jelas menunjukkan betapa kuasanya Tuhan dalam melakukan apa sahaja. Justeru, taat dan patuh kepada-Nya.

Surah Ali Imran: 27

Iktibar dan fiqh ayat:

Ibnu Kathir berkata: "Allah SWT yang mengeluarkan benih-benih tanaman sehingga membesar yang asalnya daripada sebiji benih, begitu juga mukmin daripada kafir dan kafir daripada mukmin, ayam daripada telur dan telur daripada ayam. Begitulah yang berlaku kepada seluruh alam. Ini melambangkan daripada hikmah iradah dan kehendak Allah SWT.

Al-Maraghi berkata: "Sebagaimana yang sehari-hari terjadi bahawa yang hidup dapat tumbuh kerana minum susu dan lain-lain, sedangkan makanan itu adalah benda yang mati menjadi bahan makanan untuk menumbuhkan badan, merupakan tanda yang paling penting untuk membezakan benda yang hidup daripada benda yang mati.

Para biologi telah mengatakan, misalnya ulat yang memakan daun dan daun ini berubah menjadi dagingnya. Ini merupakan tanda yang paling penting bahawa ulat itu hidup. Begitu juga bayi yang meminum susu merupakan benda yang mati kemudiannya berubah menjadi tubuh yang hidup.

"Segala urusan berada di bawah kekuasaan Engkau, dan tiada apa pun yang dapat mengatasi kekuasaan-Mu dan mengadili-Mu. Hanya Engkaulah Yang Maha Berkuasa untuk mencabut kekuasaan daripada orang yang berada di luar Islam dan menjadikan mereka hina. Sesungguhnya Engkau telah berikan kekuasaan itu kepada umat Islam dan Engkau jadikan mereka sebagai golongan yang mulia."

Hamka berkata: "Apabila Allah SWT menyuruh Rasul-Nya membaca ayat ini sebagai doa akan terlepaslah kita daripada suasana terumbang-ambing melihat perubahan keadaan dan suasana di dalam alam ini. Maka wujudlah rasa Tauhid iaitu menghimpunkan kekuasaan dan kemuliaan kepada Allah SWT. Maka bersyukurlah kepada Allah SWT ketika diberi-Nya kurnia dan bersabarlah atas dugaan-Nya."

Syeikh Mutawalli al-Sya'rawi berkata: "Allah SWT tidak membuat kadar siang untuk setiap waktu persis sama; kadang-kadang siang berkurang sekian jam, malam pun begitu jua. Namun, pengurangan itu tidak sekali gus, melainkan sedikit demi sedikit. Memang ada saat-saat perhentian antara pergantian jarum minit ke minit berikutnya, tetapi sebenarnya waktu bergerak setiap minit, bahkan setiap detik walau kita tidak melihat atau menyedarinya.

Kita tidak menyedari pertumbuhan anak yang kita lihat setiap saat, ini berbeza kalau kita meninggalkannya sebulan atau dua bulan. Ia sebenarnya akan membesar setiap detik. Oleh yang demikian, merupakan suatu pengaturan yang amat teliti, yang tidak dapat dilakukan kecuali oleh Allah SWT yang menjadikan malam ke dalam siang dan menjadikan siang ke dalam malam.

Kalau keadaan anak merupakan contoh daripada yang kecil menjadi besar, maka yang besar pun dapat mengecil. Manusia tidak memiliki kemampuan untuk mengamatinya secara langsung. Al-Sya'rawi memberi contoh tentang hal ini dengan gambar New York yang diambil oleh satelit. Begitu jugalah contoh yang telah dihuraikan secara panjang lebar oleh kami."

Syeikh Mutawalli al-Sya'rawi berkata: "Kebanyakan orang tidak mengetahui bahawa dalam satu butir tumbuhan terdapat kehidupan, dan ia berpotensi untuk tumbuh berkembang. Mereka juga seringkali tidak menyedari perbezaan antara hidup dan potensi hidup. Biji kurma yang ditanam akan tetap menjadi biji sampai ia ditanam dalam satu lingkungan yang sesuai.

Bahkan lanjut al-Sya'rawi mengutip pendapat ilmuwan, potensi gerak yang terdapat pada butir-butir kepala sebatang korek api pun berpotensi menggerakkan kereta api mengelilingi dunia sekian tahun lamanya."

Dalam ayat ini menggambarkan betapa kuasa Allah SWT tiada mungkin ditandingi oleh mana-mana makhluk. Oleh itu marilah sama-sama menjadi hamba-Nya yang benar-benar patuh kepada-Nya.

[Baca]

Ilmu memelihara agama

Ilmu memelihara agama

DI Britain, 25 Disember adalah hari Krismas sementara 26 Disember juga hari cuti yang mana kebanyakan pasar raya-pasar raya membuat jualan murah yang dianggap luar biasa. Seperti mana manusia sedunia tahu, apabila Krismas menjelang, wajah Santa Claus yang berbaju merah dan berambut putih panjang muncul di mana- mana.

Filem dan berbagai rancangan media akan mempromosikan Santa Claus dan kehadirannya pada hari Krismas. Walaupun sebahagian rancangan TV di sini mempersendakan Santa Claus. Bahkan mereka juga sering mempersendakan Jesus yang mereka anggap sebagai anak Tuhan dengan berbagai lawak jenaka yang amat tidak wajar untuk dikenakan kepada tokoh biasa, apatah lagi yang insan yang mereka anggap tuhan.

Namun, bagitulah jadinya nilai agama pada mereka. Santa Claus sebenarnya satu watak yang tidak pernah wujud dalam nas-nas agama Kristian sama ada yang telah diubah, apatah lagi yang asal. Bible sama sekali tidak pernah menyebut tentang kemunculan ‘watak Santa Claus’.

Ia hakikatnya adalah benar-benar khurafat dan bidaah yang telah palitkan kepada agama mereka sehingga ia akhirnya muncul menjadi perlambangan agama yang diterima umum dan sukar untuk dikikis lagi. Ia lebih teruk dari kepercayaan sesetengah masyarakat kita yang menyalakan lampu pada malam tujuh likur atau kepercayaan bahawa pada bulan Muharam digalakkan membuat bubur bagi mencontohi Nabi Noh a.s. Cerita Santa Claus lebih menonjol daripada faktor sebenar orang-orang Kristian menyambut Krismas.

Maka tidak hairanlah pada kita mengapakah Nabi SAW sering mengingatkan agar jangan mengada-adakan perkara yang baru atau bidaah yang dipalitkan menjadi agama. Tempelan baru yang dibuat atas nama agama jika dibiarkan akan menjadi kepercayaan yang akan mengambil tempat agama yang sebenar. Sabda Nabi SAW: Sesungguhnya sebaik-baik bicara adalah Kitab Allah, sebaik-baik petunjuk adalah petunjuk Muhammad, seburuk-buruk perkara adalah yang diada-adakan dan setiap bidaah itu sesat (Riwayat Muslim).

Al-Imam al-Syatibi (meninggal 911H) ketika mentakrifkan maksud bidaah menyebut: Jalan yang direka di dalam agama, yang menyerupai syariah, tujuan mengamalkannya untuk berlebihan dalam mengabdikan diri kepada Allah SWT. (al-Syatibi, al-I’tisam, m.s 27, Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabi).

Ertinya manusia boleh berinovasi dalam berbagai perkara, tetapi cara cuba mengadakan kepercayaan atau upacara agama yang tidak bersumberkan wahyu sehingga itu dianggap agama. Kata Dr Yusuf al-Qaradawi: “Sesungguhnya ruang melakukan rekaan dan membuat perkara baru bukannya dalam agama. Agama hanya berdasar apa yang diturunkan Allah.

Penyelewengan

 

Wajib kekal terpelihara lagi bersih dari mainan golongan yang sia-sia, penyelewengan golongan melampau, dakwaan golongan sesat dan tafsiran golongan yang jahil. Adapun ruang untuk melakukan rekaan sebenar adalah dalam urusan dunia.

Ia sangat luas dan banyak. Memerlukan keupayaan seni dan rekaan. Namun apabila kaum muslimin mundur, keadaan mereka buruk, urusan mereka rosak, pecah masyarakat mereka maka perkara tetap bagi mereka menjadi terbalik dan keadaan menjadi sebaliknya. Dalam urusan dunia mereka terhenti menjadi begitu jumud seperti batu atau lebih jumud dari itu. Mereka tidak memulakan rekaan, mengadakan dan menyingkap perkara baru.

Slogan mereka: Golongan awal tidak meninggalkan untuk yang kemudian sedikit pun. Adapun dalam agama mereka mengadakan rekaan, membuat bidaah dalam berbagai bentuk ibadah yang tidak diizinkan Allah” (al- Qaradawi, Al-‘Ibadah fi al-Islam, m.s 170, Beirut: Muassasah al-Risalah).

Istimewanya Islam dibandingkan ajaran lain, dalam Islam kita masih mempunyai sumber rujukan tertinggi iaitu al-Quran dan al-Sunnah untuk mengukur sejauh manakah pendapat golongan agamawan ataupun tokoh itu kukuh ataupun lemah.

Kita disuruh menghormati tokoh ilmuan, apatah lagi ilmuan Islam atau yang kita bahasakan sebagai ulama. Namun penghormatan kita kepada mereka tidaklah sama sekali bererti kita tidak boleh memberikan pandangan yang berbeza atas asas-asas ilmu atau penghujahan yang berteraskan fakta dan angka.

Umpamanya, ketokohan al-Imam al-Ghazali dihormati, namun kritikan tetap diberikan oleh para ulama terhadapnya. Kritikan bukanlah menunjukkan jasanya dilupakan. Antaranya, al-Hafiz al-Zahabi (meninggal 748H) yang menyebut: “Aku katakan: Al-Ghazali adalah imam yang besar, namun bukanlah menjadi syarat seorang alim itu untuk dia tidak melakukan kesilapan”. Lalu al-Imam al-Zahabi memberikan kritikan ilmiah terhadap Kitab Ihya Ulumuddin karangan al-Imam al-Ghazali, katanya: “Adapun kitab al-Ihya padanya ada sejumlah hadis yang batil. Sekiranya tidak ada padanya adab, cara dan zuhud yang diambil dari ahli falsafah dan golongan sufi yang menyeleweng, padanya ada kebaikan yang banyak. Kita memohon daripada Allah ilmu yang bermanfaat. Tahukah anda apa itu ilmu yang bermanfaat?

Ia apa yang dinyatakan al-Quran dan ditafsirkannya oleh Rasulullah secara perkataan dan perbuatan”. (Al-Zahabi, Siyar ‘Alam al-Nubala 19/339, Beirut: Muassasah al-Risalah, Beirut) Begitu juga ilmuan tafsir yang terkenal al-Imam Ibn Kathir (meninggal 774H) memberikan kritikan ilmiah terhadap karangan al-Imam al-Ghazali dalam Al-Bidayah wa Al-Nihayah: “Ketika berada di Damsyik dan Baitul Maqdis, al-Ghazali mengarang kitabnya Ihya ‘Ulumuddin, ia sebuah kitab yang ganjil. Ia mengandungi ilmu yang banyak berkaitan syarak, bercampur dengan kehalusan tasawuf dan amalan hati. Namun padanya banyak hadis yang gharib, munkar, dan palsu”. (Ibn Kathir, Al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah, 12/186, Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyyah).

Demikian ramai ilmuan lain dalam sejarah islam ini menerima berbagai kritikan dan perkara itu bukanlah ganjil. Saya sebutkan contoh ini bagi menggambarkan bahawa tidak pernah kemaksuman itu diberikan dalam Islam kepada sesiapa pun selain Allah dan rasul-Nya. Inilah jalan untuk menjamin agar ilmu sentiasa mengatasi tokoh atau institusi.

Dengan itu agama yang tulen akan terpelihara. Namun, dalam mengkritik dijaga adab dan bersikap adil. Bukanlah seperti sesetengah laman web kelompok agama atau politik agama yang mengharamkan orang lain mengkritik pimpinan mereka dan menjadikan maki-hamun itu halal bagi mereka dalam menghadapi golongan yang mereka tidak setujui.

DR. Mohd Asri ZainUl Abidin ialah

bekas mufti perlis dan sekarang pensyarah

pengajian islam, universiti sains Malaysia (usm) yang sedang sabatikal di Britain.

laman web: drmaza.com.

E-mel: moasriza@yahoo.com.

[Baca]

Berhijrah demi akidah

Berhijrah demi akidah

KEMUNCULAN bulan Muharam pada tahun ini bermakna umat Islam telah memasuki tahun baru Hijrah 1430. Sejarah mencatatkan bahawa peristiwa hijrah ini amat besar ertinya bagi perjuangan Rasulullah khususnya, dan umumnya kepada seluruh umat Islam. Peristiwa ini juga bertujuan merubah strategi perjuangan Nabi SAW. dalam menegakkan syiar Islam.

Di bawah panji-panji Islam kaum Muhajirin dan Ansar membangun persaudaraan sejati, membangun masyarakat Madani di bawah pimpinan Rasulullah

Hijrah merupakan perintah ilahiah. Dan tahun Islam mengingatkan kaum Muslim bahawa pada setiap tahun bukan sahaja terhadap kemenangan, tetapi banyaknya pengorbanan yang telah dilakukan dan bersedia untuk melakukan pengorbanan yang sama seperti yang dilakukan oleh kaum Muhajirin dan Ansar itu. Iman, hijrah dan jihad adalah trilogi perjalanan hidup Rasulullah dan para sahabat.

Trilogi tersebut diabadikan dalam al- Quran pada surah al-Baqarah ayat 218: Sesungguhnya orang-orang yang beriman, orang-orang yang berhijrah dan berjihad di jalan Allah, mereka itu mengharapkan rahmat Allah, dan Allah Maha Pengampun lagi Maha Penyayang

Dalam meneruskan perjuangan Islam ini, tiada bekalan yang paling utama selain daripada akidah itu sendiri. Hijrah sebenarnya menggambarkan perjuangan untuk menyelamatkan akidah. Kita hijrah maknawi daripada perbuatan syirik kepada tauhid, dari kufur kepada iman, dari melakukan maksiat kepada taat, dari riak kepada ikhlas, dari takbur kepada tawaduk, dari malas kepada rajin dari khianat kepada amanah, dari dusta kepada jujur, dari perpecahan dan permusuhan kepada perpaduan dan berkasih sayang.

Perjuangan menegakkan akidah umat Islam di negara ini harus dihadapi dengan perjuangan dan keyakinan bahawa Allah swt sentiasa bersama dengan kita. Ini bukan bererti Allah bertempat, berjihad (berpihak) sebagaimana fahaman kumpulan bidaah. Al-Quran sendiri menjelaskan bahawa ketika saat hijrah Rasulullah ia adalah satu kemenangan walaupun ketika itu pada pandangan kita kemenangan itu belum dicapai.

Kalau kamu tidak menolong (Nabi Muhammad) maka sesungguhnya Allah telah pun menolongnya, iaitu ketika kaum kafir (di Mekah) mengeluarkannya (dari negerinya Mekah) sedang ia salah seorang daripada dua (sahabat) semasa mereka berlindung di dalam gua, ketika ia berkata kepada sahabatnya. Janganlah engkau berdukacita, sesungguhnya Allah bersama kita.

Maka Allah menurunkan semangat tenang tenteram kepada (Nabi Muhammad) dan menguatkan dengan bantuan tentera (malaikat) yang kamu tidak melihatnya. Dan Allah menjadikan seruan (syirik) orang-orang kafir terkebawah (kalah dengan sehina-hinanya) dan kalimah Allah (Islam) ialah yang tertinggi (selama-lamanya), kerana Allah Maha Kuasa, lagi Maha Bijaksana. (Surah al- Taubah ayat 40).

Keteguhan akidah atau agama seseorang itu diukur ketika ditimpa musibah bukan saat kemenangan atau kejayaan. Semua akan memeluk satu akidah apabila melihat kejayaan, namun belum tentu demikian apabila mengalami penderitaan.

Akidah atau tauhid adalah sesuatu yang paling berharga kepada umat Islam. Para Nabi saw. diutus untuk membawa manusia kepada akidah yang sebenar iaitu tauhid mutlak.(kesaan Alah). ketuhanan yang esa dan satu inilah Tuhan yang perlu disembah, Yang terkaya dan tidak berhajat kepada suatu kerana suatu yang lain itu semuanya berhajat dan memerlukan-Nya.

Pastinya benih tanaman akidah yang suci dan bersih ini dapat melahirkan bunga-bunga perpaduan dan kasih sayang, keikhlasan dan ketakwaan serta pengorbanan.

Dalam Islam, akidah yang berunsur ketakwaan inilah yang akan melahirkan amalan yang benar-benar ikhlas, di mana amalan-amalan seseorang tidak akan diterima Allah kecuali amalan-amalan yang dilakukan oleh orang yang tidak menyekutukan atau menyerupakan Tuhannya dengan sesuatu yang lain. Dalam hal ini Allah berfirman yang bermaksud: Tidak ada seumpama-Nya suatu pun. (As-Shuraa ayat 11).

Dari segi realiti pula, apa yang berlaku di negara kita terdapat gerakan-gerakan politik dan ideologi tertentu yang telah mengutamakan kepentingan politik dan peribadi daripada agama Islam itu sendiri sehingga lahir fatwa-fatwa karut yang boleh memesongkan amalan mereka atas alasan tuntutan sunah, agama dan sebagainya.

Akibatnya, kita dapat melihat begitu banyak sekali penyelewengan fikiran dan fahaman baik besar dan kecil tanpa disedari oleh pengikut awam. Semua ini berpunca daripada amalan mentaati semua fatwa yang dikeluarkan oleh pemimpin tertentu dan setengahnya adalah daripada kalangan pemimpin tertinggi agama yang mempunyai kepentingan diri dan politik.

Adalah tidak wajar kepada mana-mana golongan, misalnya mencampuri urusan Allah berhubung dengan perkara- perkara yang hanya diketahui oleh Allah seperti iman dan kufur, syurga dan neraka atau masa depan seseorang itu masuk syurga atau neraka, kerana ia juga dikategorikan sebagai penyelewengan akidah dalam mencapai sesuatu tujuan. Dalam Islam memfatwa dengan menafikan akidah sesama Islam secara rambang dan mudah adalah terkeluar daripada sunah Rasulullah.

Islam amat ketat untuk menentukan seseorang itu terkeluar daripada akidah atau murtad, kecuali setelah dia terang- terangan menunjukkan pengkhianatannya terhadap akidah Islam. Itu pun setelah dinilai dengan saksama oleh orang yang ahli dalam bidang tersebut.

Demikian juga tuduhan zalim dan terkeluar akidah kerana menolak hukum hudud. Kerajaan sebenarnya tidak pernah menolak hukum hudud.

Kita menyokong niat baik pihak mana sekalipun untuk melaksanakan hukum hudud tetapi ia perlu mengambil kira hal- hal lain yang menuju ke arah keislaman, tidak hanya menggunakan undang-undang yang dikatakan Islam sahaja.

Keadilan

Untuk mencapai keadilan yang di harapkan bukanlah sesuatu yang mudah kerana ia perlu kepada pelaksanaan yang betul. Prosedur, keterangan-keterangan serta penyiasatan semuanya mesti betul dan tidak mengandungi sebarang syubhat. Justeru inilah pemerintah melihat dalam kontek yang lebih jauh dan berhati-hati untuk melaksanakan hukum sepenuhnya termasuk hudud dan sebagainya kerana melihatkan banyak percubaan pemerintah Islam lain di negara luar sebelum ini semuanya menempuh kegagalan dan menghinakan lagi hukum Allah itu sendiri, bukan kerana menolak hukum tersebut, tetapi untuk mempastikan ia berada dalam satu keadaan yang semua akan menolong mencapai keadilan dan kemegahan Islam itu sendiri.

Inilah sebabnya ulama telah mengariskan suatu kaedah yang jelas sebagai dasar ikutan sesiapa yang berhasrat melaksanakan hukum tersebut, untuk mengelak dari berlaku kezaliman dalam suatu perundangan yang dilaksanakan. Kata mereka: Hukuman hudud akan digugurkan jika terdapat sebarang syubhat ini berpandukan hadis Rasulullah saw. yang mengarahkan supaya pemerintah jangan melaksanakan hukum hudud kiranya masih terdapat sebarang subhat atau kesamaran.

Tetapi berlainan dengan hukum takzir yang diserahkan kepada pilihan dan budi bicara pemerintah itu sendiri, sekalipun tindakan hukum takzir itu menyebabkan pembunuhan dan sebagainya. Kerana ia telah diberikan kepada kuasa pemerintah itu sepenuhnya.

Ia harus dilaksanakan dan tidak perlu digugurkan dengan syubhat seperti hudud tadi. Ini kerana hudud adalah merupakan hukum yang telah ditentu dan ditetap Allah tetapi cara dan masa pelaksanaannya terpulang kepada budi bicara pemerintah.

Jadi hendaklah dipastikan perbezaan antara siapa yang menolak hudud, dan siapa yang menangguhkannya kerana sebab tertentu yang dibenarkan agama.

Tegasnya undang-undang yang didasarkan kepada kepentingan atau maslahah yang kebelakangan, tetapi bercanggah dengan kepentingan dan maslahah yang lebih utama bukanlah undang-undang yang Islamik kerana tidak dapat mencapai matlamat yang dikehendaki oleh syariat Islam.

Demikian juga pusat pemulihan akidah yang dikawal selia oleh Jabatan Kemajuan Islam Malaysia (Jakim) perlu memainkan peranan yang lebih aktif khususnya dalam memulihkan akidah orang yang telah murtad atau mereka yang terpengaruh dengan ajaran sesat. Ini bertujuan bagi memastikan mereka benar-benar bertaubat dan kembali ke jalan benar dan diredai Allah.

Sempena tahun baru Hijrah 1430 ini, kita harus berusaha melawan hawa nafsu yang cenderung mengajak manusia ke arah melakukan perkara-perkara kejahatan dan penyeleweng daripada lunas-lunas syariat. Hijrah daripada sifat jahil kepada sifat kecerdikan dan kepandaian dari sikap jumud tertutup kepada sikap bertoleransi dan berlapang dada. Ini semua merupakan maksud dan tuntutan hijrah dalam Islam.

Penulis ialah Pengurus Penyelidikan Yayasan Dakwah Islamiah Malaysia (YADIM)

[Baca]

Islam dari persepsi ilmuan bukan Islam

Islam dari persepsi ilmuan bukan Islam

DUA buah buku dalam bahasa Inggeris yang menyenaraikan 100 insan genius sejak zaman lampau hingga dewasa ini memberi penghormatan tinggi kepada Nabi Muhammad SAW. Kedua-duanya ditulis oleh dua ilmuan Barat bukan Islam.

Buku pertama The 100: The Most Influential Persons in History oleh Michael Har meletakkan nama Nabi Muhammas di peringkat atas sekali. Lalu dicatat betapa kombinasi pengaruh agama dan sekular Nabi Muhammad melayakkannya sebagai “manusia paling berpengaruh sekali dalam sejarah”.

Buku kedua, Genius ditulis oleh Harold Bloom, tokoh pengkritik sastera keturunan Yahudi. Olehnya disebut: “Tiada orang lain dalam sejarah manusia menyampaikan kepada kita firman Tuhan. Kita tidak boleh bersantai manakala membaca Quran atau melafaz ayat-ayatnya, sama ada bersendirian atau bersama orang-orang lain.”

Menurut Michael Hart, sebilangan tokoh yang disenaraikan lahir dan membesar di waktu perkembangan tamadun dunia yang berbudaya atau di negara-negara kancah politik. Sebaliknya pula Nabi Muhammad SAW lahir pada tahun 570 di Mekah di selatan negara Arab, ketika itu sebuah wilayah yang mundur, jauh dari pusat-pusat perdagangan, kesenian dan pendidikan pelbagai ilmu.

Hijrah Nabi Muhammad ke Madinah pada tahun 622 mencetus perubahan besar. Kalau di Mekah para pengikutnya tidak begitu ramai, maka di Madinah bilangan mereka meningkat berkali ganda.

Nabi Muhammad akhirnya mencapai kemenangan setelah kembali ke Mekah. Melaluinya rakyat Arab pelbagai kaum bersatu kemudiannya. Agama Islam berkembang ke negara-negara lain melalui kegiatan lanjut sahabatnya, Abu Bakar a.s, saidina Umar a.s dan lain-lain hingga ke negara Parsi dan Sepanyol lalu berkuasa selama hampir 800 tahun lamanya.

tewas

Kerana perbalahan sesama sendiri, antara lainnya, pemerintahan Islam di Sepanyol tewas kepada pihak Kristian. Kerana kesemuanya itu menurut Hart lagi, Nabi Muhammad “mungkin pemimpin politik yang berpengaruh sekali sepanjang masa.”

“Profesor Harold Bloom, sarjana Universiti Yale dan Universiti New York, menulis mengenai Quran dan 114 surahnya setelah, sebelumnya lahir kitab Taurat dan kitab Injil. Beliau menambah: Tidak ada kitab lain yang menyamai Quran dan ini adalah kerana Quran firman Tuhan keseluruhannya.

“Quran adalah kitab yang penting bagi setiap manusia. Ini kerana Tuhan menunjukkannya kepada kesemua manusia dan kerana itu ia kitab yang universal.”

Ayat-ayat tersebut dipetik dari lima surah, antaranya surah ke-75 Al-Qiammah. (Berikut tafsir Al-Quran terbitan Darulfikir di bawah kawalan JAKIM.)

Dengan nama Allah, Yang Maha Pemurah, Lagi Maha Pengasihani.

1. Aku bersumpah dengan hari Kiamat:

2. Dan Aku bersumpah dengan “An-Nafsul-Lawwaamah” (bahawa kamu akan dibangkitkan sesudah mati!)

3. Patutkah manusia (yang kafir) menyangka bahawa Kami tidak akan dapat mengumpulkan tulang-tulangnya (dan menghidupkannya semula?)

4. Bukan sebagaimana yang disangka itu, bahkan Kami berkuasa menyusun (dengan sempurnanya segala tulang) jarinya, (tulang yang lebih halus dari yang lain).

5. (Kebenaran itu bukan tidak ada buktinya), bahkan manusia (yang ingkar) sentiasa suka hendak meneruskan perbuatan kufur dan maksiat (sepanjang hayatnya, sehingga ia tidak mengakui adanya hari Kiamat).

6. Ia bertanya (secara mengejek): “Bilakah datangnya hari Kiamat itu”?

7. Maka (jawabnya: Hari Kiamat akan datang) apabila pemandangan menjadi berpendar-pendar (kerana gerun takut).

8. Dan bulan hilang cahayanya.

9. Dan matahari serta bulan dihimpunkan bersama

10. (Maka) pada hari itu, berkatalah manusia (yang ingkarkan hari Kiamat:) Ke manakah hendak melarikan diri?”

11. Tak usahlah bertanya demikian! Tidak ada lagi tempat perlindungan!

12. Pada hari itu, kepada Tuhanmulah sahaja terserahnya ketetapan segala perkara.

13. Pada hari itu, manusia diberitahu akan apa yang ia telah lakukan dan apa yang dia telah tinggalkan.

14. Bahkan manusia itu, (anggotanya) menjadi saksi terhadap dirinya sendiri.

Profesor Bloom, penulis 25 buku lain, juga menyebut mengenai hijrah Nabi Muhammad SAW dari Mekah ke Madinah sebagai permulaan wujudnya era Islam. Beberapa perkara yang dicatat oleh kedua-dua ilmuan Barat itu selari dengan catatan Profesor Golam Choudhury (warga Bangladesh) bekas sarjana Universiti Columbia di New York, antara lainnya:

* Dalam Islam tidak ada perpisahan antara agama dan politik. Nabi Muhammad menjadi ketua negara Islam di Madinah. Nabi bukan saja ketua agama tetapi juga pemimpin politik, negarawan dan pentadbir.

* Dalam melaksanakan tugas-tugasnya Nabi Muhammad terpaksa melakukan kempen ketenteraan bagi melindungi Islam dan menyertai rundingan-rundingan diplomatik.

Karya kedua-dua penulis Barat itu berbeza sama sekali daripada tindak-tanduk Geert Wilders, ahli Parlimen Belanda penerbit filem Fitna yang anti Quran.

Demikian juga dengan Theo Van Gogh yang menghina Islam melalui filemnya Submission serta rakannya Ayaan Hirsi Ali, bekas ahli Parlimen Belanda. Ia wanita Afrika yang mulanya beragama Islam, tetapi kemudian keluar dari agama Islam dan menulis buku menganggap dirinya kafir. Di samping itu para kartunis melukis 12 kartun Nabi Muhammad dalam akhbar Denmark Jyllands-Posten atas alasan kebebasan akhbar.

Baru-baru ini pula sebuah akhbar Inggeris menyiarkan berita mengenai 1,600 madrasah di Britain yang punyai kira-kira 200,000 murid belajar membaca Quran. Sebilangan murid dikatakan dipukul oleh guru-guru mereka.

Penulis ialah konsultan kanan ISIS Malaysia. Pandangan

penulis adalah pendapat

peribadi dan tidak ada

kena-mengena dengan ISIS.

[Baca]

Nabi Ibrahim melawan Raja Namrud

APAKAH kamu tidak memerhatikan orang yang mendebat Ibrahim tentang Tuhannya (Allah) kerana Allah memberikan kepada orang itu pemerintahan (kekuasaan). Ketika Ibrahim mengatakan: "Tuhanku ialah Yang Menghidupkan dan Yang Mematikan." Orang itu berkata: "Saya dapat menghidupkan dan mematikan." Ibrahim berkata, "Sesungguhnya Allah menerbitkan matahari dari timur, maka terbitkanlah dia dari barat." Lalu terdiamlah orang kafir itu dan Allah tidak memberi petunjuk kepada orang-orang yang zalim. (al-Baqarah: 258)

Peristiwa ini berlaku selepas sahaja baginda keluar dari api yang membakar dirinya. Nabi Ibrahim semakin bersemangat untuk meneruskan dakwah kerana bertambah yakin dengan petunjuk dan perlindungan daripada Allah SWT. Baginda menjalankan dakwah tidak berhenti-henti kepada kaumnya.

Suatu hari, kegiatan dakwahnya itu telah diketahui oleh Raja Namrud. Raja Namrud berasa sangat risau dan susah hati. Dia bimbang kekuasaannya akan tergugat kerana dakwah yang dijalankan oleh Nabi Ibrahim. Dia juga bimbang sekiranya kerajaannya akan musnah disebabkan oleh pengaruh dan dakwah yang dijalankan oleh Nabi Ibrahim.

Raja Namrud telah memanggil Nabi Ibrahim supaya datang mengadapnya. Apabila Nabi Ibrahim tiba, Raja Namrud pun bertanya kepada Nabi Ibrahim:

"Apakah fitnah dan api permusuhan yang engkau sebar dan engkau khabarkan di tengah-tengah rakyatku? Siapa Tuhan yang engkau minta rakyatku menyembahnya? Ada lagikah Tuhan yang engkau kenal dan patut disembah selain aku? Siapa yang mempunyai kedudukan setinggi kedudukanku dan siapa yang memiliki kekuasaan seluas kekuasaanku? Tidakkah engkau nampak, aku berkuasa mengatur dan mentadbir kerajaanku yang luas ini, menetapkan dan membatalkan sesuatu menurut kehendakku tanpa ada sesiapa dapat menghalangnya ? Segala keputusanku ditaati dan tidak ada sesiapa pun dapat menundanya. Semua orang bergantung kepadaku untuk meminta pertolongan dan mereka tidak berani melawannya. Mengapa engkau berani menentang aku? Kamu bukan menghina malah merosakkan sembahan-sembahan rakyatku."

Nabi Ibrahim pun menjawab kata-kata Raja Namrud itu dengan tenang sekali, "Aku tidak menyebarkan fitnah atau menimbulkan kekacauan. Aku hanya membawa kebenaran dan mahu menghapuskan kesesatan. Aku mengajak orang ramai supaya menyekbah Allah, Tuhan yang menghidupkan dan mematikan, memberi kehidupan kepada makhluk-Nya atau mencabut nyawa.

Itulah Tuhan yang aku sembah dan aku mengajak orang menyembah-Nya. Bukan patung-patung yang dibuat oleh mereka sendiri."

Namrud berasa amat tidak berpuas hati. "Jika Tuhan yang engkau sembah dapat menghidupkan dan mematikan, aku pun mampu melakukannya. Seseorang yang mesti menjalani hukuman mati apabila diampunkan olehku maka dia akan hidup dan apabila orang itu dijatuhi hukuman mati, maka ertinya aku telah mematikan dia. Sekarang tidak ada bezanya Tuhanmu dengan diriku. Mengapa engkau tidak menyembahku?"

Nabi Ibrahim masih tidak berputus asa. "Baiklah, Tuhanku telah menciptakan matahari dengan kedudukan terbit setiap hari di sebelah timur dan terbenam di sebelah barat. Jika engkau benar-benar berkuasa, cubalah engkau ubah kedudukannya itu. Dapatkah engkau melakukannya?"

Namrud akhirnya terdiam seketika. Dia tidak dapat melawan kata-kata dan hujah daripada Nabi Ibrahim. Mulai dari saat itulah, Namrud menganggap Nabi Ibrahim sebagai musuh yang perlu dilayan dengan berhati-hati. Dia tidak mahu menampakkan kebencian yang nyata kepada Nabi Ibrahim. Sebagai langkah berjaga-jaga Namrud telah menghantar beberapa pasukan pengawal untuk menyiasat segala kegiatan Nabi Ibrahim.

[Baca]

Great expectations

[Baca]

TERRORISM

Posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at December 26, 2008 4:47 PM | Permalink | Comments (76) | TrackBacks (0) | Previous Blog
1. Every day we hear, we read and we watch on television reports about acts of terrorism somewhere. No place seems to be free from terrorism.

2. From Indonesia to New York, suicide bombers, airplanes, cars and vans loaded with explosives are being blown up, killing people and destroying buildings almost with impunity.

3. Security measures have been taken, using sophisticated and costly methods, specially trained anti-terror squads, electronic detectors and tedious body searches, including scrutiny of shoes, hand bags and luggage. But the terror attacks have gone unabated. We seem to have to live with this danger striking where we least expect with no end in sight.

4. Great thinkers, journalists, political analysts and politicians of all shades and colour have written at length and given their reasons and their analysis of these acts of terror, why people should be willing to blow themselves up frequently killing innocent people.

5. The analysts and writers have attributed such acts as being due to the teachings of the Prophet of Islam, as the tendencies of Muslims to be violent, as the expressions of the clash of civilisation, as the jealousies against people who are better off themselves. They blame the extremism of the Wahabi sect of Islam and the hatred of leaders of the sect such as Osama bin Laden.

6. Based on their analysis they prescribed measures to curb terrorist activities, arresting suspected, subjecting them to torture and humiliation.

7. But still the acts of terror have gone on and show signs of escalating. Muslim airline passengers are made to go through humiliating searches, detained for hours. Hundreds of so-called terrorist suspects have been detained without trial for years, often humiliated and tortured with no means of seeking redress.

8. But through all these the real reason for these violent acts of terror has been deliberately ignored. It is as if the Europeans and the Americans are in a state of denial. It is as if all the European and American leaders fear to state the truth. Their media too appear to conspire to avoid mentioning the true cause of the anger and frustration of the people who commit these acts of terror.

9. Yet if we pause to think we cannot help but notice that these acts began with the forceful seizure of the land of the Palestinian Arabs in order to create the formerly non-existent state of Israel; the expulsion of the Arab Palestinians from their homes and their country, the killings of the Arabs by Zionist terrorists, and the incarceration of the Arab Palestinians in makeshift refugee camps for the last 60 years or so.

10. This is the basic and original cause of the acts of terror. Initially the neighbouring Arab countries tried to regain Palestinian land through conventional war. But Israel with the help of America and Britain defeated the forces of Syria, Jordan and Egypt.

11. Not only were they defeated but Israel grabbed more Arab land. At each attempt to regain Palestinian land, Israel together with America and Britain seized more Arab land.

12. In the area of Palestine which the Israelis have not seized, Jewish settlements were set up. Roads were built on Arab land which the Arab Palestinians are not allowed to use. High walls are built to break up Arab villages, preventing the villagers from contacting their close relatives even.

13. In the meanwhile the world watched the expulsion of Arab Palestinian and their plight with little concern and less sympathy.

14. Against the powerful Israeli forces the Palestinians could do nothing. They have no guns or tanks or fighter planes. Angry and frustrated they tried guerrilla war. But this was to no avail.

15. Eventually they resorted to what is referred to as terror attacks. Not having delivery vehicles they made use of suicide bombers, blowing themselves up.

16. Instead of resolving the Palestinian issue the Americans and the British decided to attack other Muslim countries. Afghanistan and Iraq were invaded, and Syria and Iran are threatened. Naturally this did not help solve the Palestinian issue. It simply aggravated the problem. And now other Muslim people, knowing that there can be no solution by their Government have adopted the same terror tactics as the Palestinians.

17. I was in Syria recently to attend a conference on the "Right of Return" of the Palestinian people I was also in Iran and Yemen. Everywhere I went I found among the ordinary people anger and hatred directed at the Jews, the Americans and the British. Their Governments are terrified by the British and the Americans. But their people are more and more bitter. There will be many who would be willing to blow themselves up even if they will not succeed in liberating their countries.

18. Terror attacks will not diminish for as long as the Palestinians are forced to remain as refugees, are denied the right of return.

19. America will have a new President soon. If the membership of his Cabinet and his staff are anything to go by, there is little that Obama can do, even if he wants to solve the Palestinian problem. All American Presidents and legislators are hostages of Israel. Fail to side with Israel and they will be defeated at the next elections.

20. "Terrorism" is going to be a part of the world scene for a very, very long time.

[Baca]

The Right Of Return

by Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

1. Bismillahhirohmanirrohim.Assalamualaikum warahmatulla hiwabarakatuh.

2.Firstly I would like to thank the Government of Syria for the hospitality extended to me and for its unfailing support for the Palestinian cause.

3.All Praise be to Allah by whose grace we are able to gather here today to remember, to not forget the injustice perpetrated upon our brothers and sisters, the peoples of Palestine 60 years ago, in May 1948.

4.On that infamous day in May 1948 our brothers and sisters, their fathers and mothers and their children were expelled from their country, from their land and their homes, expelled cruelly by Zionist forces as the British, the Americans and the Russians looked on and basically abetted in these heinous crimes. The rest of the world cared nothing for the catastrophe, the Nakba the tragedy that had been deliberately visited by the Zionist upon the people who had been their hosts before, who had allowed them to immigrate and settle on their land thinking that as in the past, during the great days when Muslims ruled the land, the newcomers would live in peace with them.

5. But the immigrants from Europe and elsewhere had other intentions. They came not to live in peace with the Palestinian people but to seize the country and make it their own.

6. Perhaps it is not strange at all to see the Americans and the British aiding and abetting the Zionists. The British and the Americans had done this very thing to a lot of other people before. In the Americas, Australia and New Zealand they had also seized other peoples’ land and committed genocide in the process.

7. This is the way of the British and other Europeans. This is the way of the Americans. Seizing other people’s land and setting and committing genocide is normal and proper to them.

8. It is not surprising therefore that in order to atone for their crimes against the Jews they should abet in the seizure of other people’s land to create a Jewish state.

9. The expectation of these people who seized other people’s land is always the same. They expect their past black deeds to be forgotten and their ownership of the land they had stolen would in time no longer be disputed. But their seizure of other peoples land must never be forgotten.

10. That is why this gathering is very important.

11. The Palestinians must not forget the Nakba and the world must also not be allowed to forget this injustice.

12. Today the Palestinians have to live outside their land as refugees, living mostly in makeshift camps, without proper facilities, housing etc. They are denied their rights to live like normal people.

13. There are now 4 million of them, deprived of their rights as citizens of their country. Their children do not have the same rights and future as other children.

14. The Palestine refugees are not even allowed to return to the land which was theirs before.

15. Everyday more and more of their land is stolen. Illegal Jewish settlers build permanent settlements on their land. They are not even allowed to use the roads built on their land. And they are forcibly separated by walls from their own kith and kin. Even villages are split by the wall. The Jews have learnt a lot about Nazi methods.

16. Truly no other people have been treated the way the Palestinian people have been treated.

17. The world talks of human rights. If one Chinese man is denied the right to speak against his own Government the whole world would condemn this deprivation of a minor right of just one person. But when four million Palestinians are expelled from their own country, are not allowed to return, are frequently attacked by the Zionists and their American and British allies, the world is deathly silent.

18. There really is a lot of hypocrisy in the world today.

19. I am against violence. I am against war. But when people are violently attacked they have a right to defend themselves.

20. When people are deprived of their country and are not able to fight conventional wars to liberate their country then then they will have to resort to other ways.

21. Blowing oneself up is not the most pleasant way to die. But when this is the only way to attack the oppressors, to defend yourself, then, pleasant or not you will have to blow yourself up.

22. If by doing this your enemies are blown up together with you, can these desperate suicide bombers be called terrorists? If they are terrorists because they allegedly commit acts of terror, because they terrify people, don’t the people who drop bombs on innocent people, who fire missiles at people, don’t they terrify their victims? If they terrify people, are not their acts also acts of terror? Are they not terrorists?

23. Actually more people, ordinary civilians are terrified of being bombed and killed by trained military murderers than are the people who are terrified and killed by suicide bombers. By any standard the bombers and people who launched missiles at human targets are worst terrorists. They do not even risk being killed or injured. Whereas the suicide bombers invariably get killed when they explode their bombs, the trained bombers will go back to celebrate over glasses of beer their murderous acts.

24. If we do not want to see suicide bombers blowing themselves up, than the people who drop bombs or launch missiles against innocent people should stop such acts of terror.

25. If we do not want to see both acts of terror, if the world abhors terrorism then the world must not close their collective eyes to the injustice perpetrated against the Palestinian people.

26. Let us not hear of the Jews being the first people in Palestine and that there never were a Palestine or Palestinian people. If the first people must be recognised as having a greater right, then let us see America, Australia and New Zealand return to the Red Indians, the aborigines of Australia and the Maoris of New Zealand their lands. If the world would not accept this kind of claim then the Jews should not use this as the basis for their claim.

27. The fact is that the Palestinian people had been living in Palestine long before the Crusades. When the Crusaders came Palestinians were under the rule of the Arabs. The people the Crusaders seized the country from were Arabs. The people who re-conquered Palestine and ruled it until after the First World War were Arabs. The Palestine that was made a Mandated territory under the British was the Palestine of the Palestinian Arabs. It was not the Israel of the Jews, though there were Jews in Arab Palestine.

28. At no time did the Crusaders or the First World War Allies deal with a Jewish Government or with Jews when they conquered Palestine, or when they made Palestine a Mandated territory.

29. The Jews who were involved in setting up Israel on Palestine soil were never the inhabitants of the land the world recognized as Palestine. They were foreigners, most of whom were citizens of European countries.

30. At the time when Palestine became a mandated territory there was only a tiny number of Jews in Palestine. These were mainly the descendants of the Jews who had lived in the land they called Palestine. They never called it Israel, nor claim that the Palestinian Arabs were living in their State of Israel.

31. So how can the Jews claim they have a legitimate right to the land of the Palestinians which they now call Israel? The State of Israel is totally artificial – a creation of people foreign to the land, a creation of non-Jews of Europe in collaboration with European Jews.

32. It is this artificial state unjustly created by foreigners on Palestine land which ever since its creation has plunged the region and indeed the whole world into violence, terrorism and wars.

33. It is this disregard for the rights of the Palestinians, in particular the right of return that has triggered off tension between people who had for centuries lived together in peace.

34. It is this gross injustice which has made a reality of the clash of civilization.

35. The clash, the tensions, the violence and the wars will not end until justice is done to the most unfortunate victims.

36. The Palestine peoples whether Muslims or Christians must continue their struggle for the right of return.

37. Theirs is a just struggle and justice must triumph finally.

38. The cost will be high for the Palestinians but the cost will be higher for those who aided and abetted in this act of injustice.

39. We are with the Palestinians in their just struggle and we will support it till justice is done.

40. Thank you.
[Baca]

Outsiders Barred From Tun Mahathir's Talk at Imperial College

Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad [Source: The Star] LONDON: Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad was left fuming over a last-minute decision to bar outsiders from attending his talk on war crimes at Imperial College here on Friday. The former prime minister said he regretted any attempt to block his speech entitled Expose War Crimes: Criminalise War at Imperial College. Scores of Malaysians and non-Malaysians were left stranded outside the Sir Alexander Flemming building in the college when they were barred from entering the lecture theatre hall where the talk was held. Security guards stationed near the entrance were seen checking for Imperial College identification cards before allowing them in. During his speech, Dr Mahathir said he believed that Britain was a country where free speech was upheld. "I'm sorry that it didn't look very free today," he added. One of the organisers of the talk, Faizal Fathil said they were only informed of the restriction at about 6pm on Thursday. "We had expected about 700 people but only a maximum of 320 could attend the talk," said Faizal. Despite the hiccup, Dr Mahathir was his usual self as he spoke about the qualities of a good prime minister. "He must fulfil his vows in looking after the people and not be interested in what he gains for himself," he said. On Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak's concern that the transition of power now would affect the Barisan Nasional, he said this would happen. On the contrary, he said, the Barisan would not have enough time to recover for the next general election if the change of leadership was delayed. "And the people who voted for the Opposition will remain with them," he said. Dr Mahathir also advised the world to "go back to bows and arrows" instead of pumping massive funds into defence spending. He said, for instance, just a fraction of the reported US$3 trillion spent by the United States on the Iraq war so far could go a long way in helping the world's poor and sick. Replying to a question on Malaysia's defence spending during his term of office, Dr Mahathir said he regretted it very much. "But today, questions would be raised if you don't buy fighter planes and your neighbour buys one," he said.

[Baca]

The Criminalisation of War by Tun Mahathir Mohamad

The Criminalisation of War by Tun Mahathir Mohamad

When I was in Japan recently I had the opportunity to explain about Malaysia's Non-Governmental Organisation's campaign to make war a punishable crime. The Japanese had been guilty of perpetrating brutalities during their Manchurian Incident and war against China and also during the Pacific War. On the other hand they were the only people in the world to experience the first ever nuclear war, of having their citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki reduced to ashes by atomic bombs, with the loss of 200,000 lives and thousands more struck down by radiation sickness later. For the Japanese the realities of war and the killings have been fully understood from their experience. I believe they can be expected to support a campaign to make war a crime. I spoke about the horrors of war to three separate groups i.e. the Nikkei Future of Asia Forum, breakfast meeting with the head of Nikkei and his senior staff and before a full audience at the Foreign Correspondent’s Club, Tokyo. While in England in April I was invited by the Ramadhan Foundation to speak about the Criminalisation of War at the Imperial College in London. An interesting incident was the attempt by Jewish students to stop me from speaking at the Imperial College because I am regarded as being anti-Semitic. The authorities were embarassed by this demand and almost decided to stop me. I was waiting for them to do so. Then I could go there to see if they would stop me. If they did I would be able to say that there is no freedom of speech in England. However, the authorities decided that only students from the Imperial College would be allowed to attend. Still the hall was full with standing room only. At all these meetings I was able to explain why war should be regarded as a crime. I pointed out that it is ridiculous to regard murder as a crime punishable with the most extreme penalty yet the deliberate killings of thousands of people, mostly innocent men, women and children are regarded as proper and legal. There is a contradiction here which does not fit in with human values in a civilised world. Today trillions of dollars are being expended on the development and production of ever more lethal weapons of mass destruction. Poor countries are forced to buy these weapons by playing on their false sense of pride. They buy these expensive weapons so as not to be less well-equipped than their neighbours. Yet these weapons are often not used at all. Still they have to be upgraded or replaced with newer versions at tremendous cost. Malaysia has been drawn into this game. We have bought two submarines costing over RM3 billion. When are we going to use them? Are we contemplating going to war with our neighbours? I can think of other ways of spending RM3 billion in Malaysia. We need a defence force to preserve our independence. But do we have to be involved in an arms race? Only the suppliers of arms would benefit from an arms race. War is not a solution for our foreign policy agenda. A stiff backbone is far more important. Unfortunately at the moment we don't have that. The campaign against war and the criminalisation of war has gained momentum. This is going to be a long-drawn struggle. But it has to begin somewhere if we are going to achieve this radical change in the mindsets of people. God-willing insya’allah this struggle will eventually succeed. Via this blog I would like to apeal to all Malaysians to support this campaign. We may feel safe from war now. But we must remember and think about all those people who now face the prospect of being bombed and rocketed, of having their heads and limbs torn from their bodies, of being killed. That they are non-combatants and have done no one any harm does not seem to matter to the warmongers. They will suffer all the same. When war broke out in Europe in 1939 we in Malaysia thought we were safe. But we were not. In a world war we too will be subjected to attack. Our forces will not be able to do much. We don't foresee this happening to us. But it can happen if war is still regarded as a way to settle conflicts between nations. That is why I believe that it is important to make war a crime and so to stop it from being the way to settle conflicts between nations.

[Baca]

War Profiteering Halliburton should not be allowed to operate in Malaysia

The Perdana Global Peace Organisation (PGPO) strongly condemns the recent opening of Halliburton’s manufacturing centre in Iskandar Malaysia, Johor. The American oil and gas company which is linked to the current United States Vice President, Dick Cheney, has been raking in billions of dollars in profit from the American invasion of Iraq which has entered its fifth bloody year. It is appalling that we have allowed this war-profiteering company to invest in Malaysia. Iskandar Malaysia Chief Executive Officer Datuk Ikmal Hijaz Hashim has been quoted defending Haliburton and even expressed his happiness at the willingness of the company to invest in Johor. Are we so void of our humanity that we have to allow these war criminals to come in and thrive in our economy? Do we really need the blood money of a neo conservative entity that has played a role in the murder of innocent Iraqis to fund our development? Cheney and George Bush are oil men and war criminals who have profited tremendously from the war in Iraq. Cheney is a major stockholder in Halliburton whose stocks have increased from USD 10 before the war to around USD 46 today. The phenomenal increase in value of its stocks is due to Halliburton continuously winning no-bid contracts in Iraq amounting to almost 20 billion dollars. As a nation that has firmly opposed the invasion and colonisation of Iraq right from the beginning, it is a painful change in direction to allow Halliburton to operate in Malaysia. As a nation that has played a lead role in the Organisation of the Islamic Conference since its conception, it is deplorable that we have opened our doors to these war criminals that have plundered and destroyed Iraq, a sovereign nation that was invaded on false pretexts. Today, more than a million Iraqis have died in the war that has been supported by firms such as Halliburton; which have benefited from the U.S being able to control the flow of oil in West Asia. Surely in our endeavor to progress, we can still afford to be humane and conscientious. We must be sensitive to the sufferings of our brother humans elsewhere before we agree to accept even a single cent from these murderers. The dead in Iraq need their justice. These warmongers who made the decision to destroy Iraq must be condemned and brought to justice for their crimes against humanity. Bush and Cheney must be put on trial for the blood on their hands as well as for all the money they have made from Iraq in the past five years. We at PGPO reiterate our fervent objection and strongly denounce the setting up of Halliburton’s 200 million ringgit manufacturing centre at Iskandar Malaysia in Johor. The Malaysian government must not allow these war profiteers to put their ill-gotten profits to operate in any way in our beloved country. On another note, we wish to express our utter disappointment with the decision of the Dewan Rakyat to dismiss the motion by Dato' Seri Abdul Hadi Awang to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the tragedy of Nakba. The action of the Dewan Rakyat does not reflect the aspirations and the sentiments of the Malaysian people who share in the suffering of their Palestinian brothers and sisters. To reject this motion on the basis that it is not urgent is a negation of the very ideals that we hold sacred such as peace and the sanctity of life. It is bad enough that countries such as the United States, Britain and Australia are celebrating Israel’s 60 years of statehood, the least we can do is for our parliamentary sitting to show empathy and solidarity with the Palestinian people. Tun Dr Mahathir bin Mohamad Chairman Perdana Global Peace Organisation

[Baca]

Tun Dr. Mahathir: Asia should liberate itself from Western mental hegemony and support us

23 May 2008, Friday At the Japan Foreign Correspondents’ Club [Tokyo, Japan] I would like to thank you for this invitation to speak on the role of Malaysia and Asia on international affairs involving politics, economic and the environment. By itself I do not think Malaysia can do much. But Asia is perhaps more able to contribute to these fields. Asia is not homogenous like Europe. The people of Asia range from dark-skinned people to brown skinned to yellow and to white Caucasians. It is not possible for all these different people inhabiting different parts of Asia to collaborate in voicing identical views on anything. It is not possible at this point in time to think of an Asian Union with the same clout as the European Union. Obviously Asia’s contribution would differ greatly between the ethnic and the regional groupings. This will render Asia less able to influence international affairs. However certain parts and certain countries of Asia, particularly those in the East and India have gained a level of development, which would make their voices heard and respected by the rest of the world. They would therefore be able to play a role in international affairs. Unfortunately they are not doing so. They are very reticent and unwilling to take a prominent role. This is because Asians have not got over their having been dominated in the past by the West. Because of this Asia is always trying to understand and accommodate Western ideas and creeds. Asia has tried to adopt European ideologies, European systems of Government, European perceptions of things and values, European regimes for trade and finance etc. etc. There has never been an Asian initiative for the world in any field. When globalisation was promoted by the West, Asians merely try to adjust to a new concept of international relations, particularly in trade, commerce and finance. Asians failed to recognise the inevitability of a New World Order resulting from the advances in speed of travel and instant communication and so to propose new regimes for the world. If Asia wants to play a role in international affairs it must first liberate its minds from Western mental hegemony. This must be through deliberate effort. Asians can fall back on their greatness in the past and learn how to reassert themselves. After all Asians discovered Europe before the Europeans discovered Asia. Spain, the Mediterranean lands and Eastern Europe were ruled for centuries by Asians. So Asian involvement in international affairs is not new. Asian countries have shown that when they have the political will they can excel in all the activities once dominated by the Europeans. Asian countries have now become developed, have been able to set up effective governments and have replaced the European countries in the production of all kinds of goods and services. Many have now developed inventive skills and introduced new products to the world. But Asians have shied away from formulating new ideas and ideologies, new systems and new trading and financial regimes for the world. Yet I am quite sure that if Asians put their minds to it they can offer better solutions to international problems. There is no doubt that the international trade and financial regime as formulated by the west have now been shown to be disastrous for the world. The US Dollar is no longer stable for use as the benchmark for other currencies. Trading in currencies have now undermined the value of the currencies of the world including the United States. Free trade has resulted in many poor countries becoming unable to export their products and earn foreign exchange. Mergers and acquisitions by giant corporations have created monsters that have killed the small man and created serious social and economic problems for the many countries. While all these disasters are happening Asian countries have either been bystanders or they have tried to struggle for survival. They have not proposed anything original or shown any initiative to overcome these problems. Yet they are in a position to do something not just to mitigate the effect of these Western conceived systems and regimes but to propose entirely new ideas and proposals that can replace the old regimes and usher in a new and fairer World Order. Asians can propose fair trade instead of free trade; the replacement of the US Dollar by a new trading currency, the stoppage of currency trading, replacing it with a new Bretton Woods kind of agreement that can restore stability in the valuation of currencies, imposing limits on mergers and acquisitions and the formulation of an international anti-trust laws etc. etc. I would like to mention a particular effort initiated by Malaysia. The world still accepts that one way of solving conflicts between nations is to kill people and see who can kill the most. This is called war but war is about killing people. In human society killing is a serious crime meriting the most severe punishment. Yet killing thousands of people in a war is not considered a crime. This is absurd. You must not kill one person but you can kill hundreds of thousands. Malaysia is trying to make killing people in war as much a crime as murder in any human society. This is to be a total change in human values. Whoever initiates wars must be condemned as criminal killers and must be punished by the international community. Asia can back this effort by Malaysia. This can be a major initiative by Asia. If Asia succeeds in stopping the killings, in making war a crime, it will mark a powerful contribution of Asia to human civilisation. It will mean that the human race has become truly civilised.

[Baca]

Tun Dr. Mahathir: "Expose War Crimes: Criminalise War"

1. It is heartening to be asked to speak on criminalizing war ? a subject that needs to be taken up by all civilized people. How can we claim to be civilized when we condone and legalise mass killings of men, women and children, the old and the sick as a solution to conflicts between nations. We usually consider the most successful killers, the ones who do the most amount of damage as the winners and they are entitled to put thr losers on trial and punish them, including murdering them. The judges in these courts are nationals of the winning countries. There can be no impartiality.
2. Yet at the same time we consider murder as a very serious crime which merit severe punishment. The more civilized countries claim to be so concerned about human life that they have abolished the death penalty, even for murderes.
3. But these same countries and these same people consider the bombing innocent civilians, launching explosive missiles against them, machine gunning and blowing them up with grenades as ligitimise and morally right.
4. There is something wrong there. How can we object to the murder of individual when approve mass killing of innocent people. Yet that is what we do in war ? we kill people, not always soldiers who may kill us but, now, more and more often, innocent civilians who can do us no harm.
5. War was in the ancient times a necessary option in the settlement of conflicts between primitive people of nations. But in thoese days the capacity to kill and to destroy was limited. The weapons used were incapable of mass destruction or mass killings. Soldiers had to handle the swords, bows and arrows, spears and daggers themselves. They had to face the enemies who were similarly armed. If they failed to kill the enemy they would be killed themselves.
6. Wars were fought by soldiers on battle fields in those days. Of the necessity the armies were small and the killings were relatively small. The losers would submit to the victors and the war would be over. The killings would also stop.
7. But over time the war-like nations developed more and more lethal weapons and the killings have become more massive. Now we are seeing weapons of mass destruction capable of killing hundreds of thousands, not on battle fields but just about anywhere. The whole country is made a battlefield, sparing neither towns nor countryside, neither soldiers nor civilians, the old, the sick and the disabled men, women and children. The killings and the devastation is total.
8. Such is the callousness of the human race that we see the killings and the wounds inflicted as just numbers, as casualties, and now as collaterals. The warriors gleefully notch their weapons to record scores of kills. It is as if these victims are not human. Yet the sufferings and the pain are very real to these people, to their families and friends.
9. These people may killed by the wounds inflicted, or they may have their limbs and their heads torn off from their bodies while still alive. The sufferings may be over quickly but imagine having parts of your body torn off, your head pulled out from your neck.
10. For those who survive, the pain and the suffering must be terrible. And in most cases no help would be forthcoming, no medical aid and, no hospitals to be taken to. They may lie there on the roads, of the fields or buried and crushed under fallen buildings, for hours with no hope for rescue. They may suffer horribly for hours until death relives them.
11. We are not talking about one or two persons. With modern weapons, hundreds and thousands would experience this horror, the pain and death.
12. We would strive hard to raise money to treat one cancer patient for example. We are so human and humane. Yet we think nothing of killing healthy people by ten of thousands.
13. We read about the war, we even see pictures and TV coverage of war but we hardly ever get to see the real sufferings of the victims of war. We practically enjoy the TV coverage of war without thinking about the sufferings of fellow-humans just like us who had been wounded and killed in real life, not just in the cinema or TV screens.
14. We do not think of the smell of war, of the smell of rotting bodies, of gangrenous legs and arms, because our television cannot bring these odours to our comfortable sitting room. In fact the TV cameras avoid showing the horrors resulting from the war. They do not want to offend our sensitivities. Nor do they record and broadcast the screams of pain of the wounded and the dying.
15. We must all know that war is about pain and death and destruction. But after the civilised countries of the West developed standing armies to replace the irregular rabbles, the state and the leaders of these countries began to glorify war. They promoted the idea that war was noble and those who fought wars and die or were wounded were heroes and the icons of the people. They struck medals to decorate the killers they sent into battle.
16. Soldiers in the standing armies began to be fitted with smart uniforms embellished with stars and gold braids. They glorify the killers with statues and monuments. And stories are told of their exploits i.e. of the murders they committed. Eternal flames burn over their graves.
17. In peace times they were made to parade in their smart uniforms, proudly showing off their skills at marching with precision like so many mechanical brainless robots. And indeed their brains had nothing in them other than thoughts of killing. The leaders are so proud and the girls are thrilled at the sight of these brainless killers.
18. They were continuously trained in killing people, not necessarily enemy soldiers. There were elite troops, equipped with the best weapons, and trained to kill in the most hideous ways. They were taught how to creep up to an unsuspecting victim and slit his throat. There was no thought about the victim being as his attacker, most likely with wife and children, brothers and sisters. There was no thought that a moment ago he was alive and breathing, just like his attacker. He must be killed because he was the enemy.
19. These elite forces troops invariably undergo a psychological cange. They became killers, pitiless killers. They look forward to wars so they can put their killing skills into practise.
20. But for years there may be no war. They retire and try to take up civilian life. But they are trained murderers. The forces have released murderers in the midst of ordinary people.
21. They will find difficulty to adjust. Hardened and trained to look at killings as a vocation, they either become criminals, murderers or psychopaths.
22. Those soldiers who had to serve on the war front, fighting and killing and witnessing the horrors and becoming immune to the sufferings of others cannot but become psychopaths also. They would find difficulty to adjust to civilian life. They may become mentally deranged.
23. In todays war waged by the U.S. the soldiers may be exposed to radiation, if not from nuclear explosions, perhaps from handling shells etc coated with depleted uranium. They will suffer from radiation sicknesses, from cancer.
24. The people who sent these young people to fight their wars will be safe. They will eat well, drink well, and enjoy life's luxuries. It is the young who will suffer, who will pay the ultimate price.
25. The novelists, the television and film producers will concoct glorious stories of war and heroes. It does not matter if they are blatant lies. It is good for making money. The U.S. lost the war in Vietnam but on the cinema and TV screens Rambo would single-handedly defeat the whole Vietnamese army. And the Americans and their allies just love it. They would feel so proud seeing the exploits of Rambo on the screens.
26. And youngsters would be taken in with the pictorial glory depicted and would be persuaded to join the killers in the armed forces, to gloriously kill and wound the enemies.
27. The leaders of the countries with the finest team of killers equipped with the best arms would not hesitate to send their young people to their death based on fabricated lies. That was what happened in Iraq. But the people of these countries re-elected these liars so they may continue to send the cream of their young people to their death.
28. That is what war really is ? not a glorious struggle for democracy and human rights, but merely to satisfy the crazy ambitions of lying leaders of the powerful countries. In the old days leaders and generals lead from the front. The cowardly leaders of today stay clear thousands of miles from the front, sipping wine and gorging themselves on the finest food.
29. Even as we talk here, wars are going on in several places initiated by the bullies of the world. People are being killed and maimed. We need to make quick progress with the criminalisation of war.
30. It will not be easy of course. William Wilberforce spent 20 long years to get the British Parliament to outlaw slave trading nearly 300 years ago. But slave trading is nothing compared to the killings and the breaches of basic human rights in modern war. This is not to say that slavery and slave trading are less heinous than war. But the struggle against war is far more serious because every day newer killing machines are being invented by the rich and powerful in order to kill more people. And the urge to try out these machines is very strong.
31. Actually, these new weapons are bankrupting the nations of the world. To recover the cost of research, development and production these advanced countries are selling their weapons to countries which can ill afford them.
32. As soon as the weapons are sold to the poor, newer weapons would be invented or the previous weapons would be modified and updated. Then the arms salesmen would come again. If a country refuses to buy, a neighbouring country would be persuaded to buy. Then the salesmen would return to the first country and broadly hint that if it does not buy then its forces would be inferior to its neighbours.
33. Even if the countries are not at war with each other, their military personnel would feel unhappy if they cannot have the new toys. And so money that the poor can ill-afford would flow to the rich countries. As the weapons are upgraded and newer weapons invented the flow of money to the rich would become a deluge. The poor will get even poorer.
34. The worst part is that the poor countries will probably have no occasion to use the sophisticated weapons. Yet they have to be maintained at high cost while they give no returns at all to the poor nations.
35. The arms trade is destroying the economies of many poor countries. Yet the exporting countries are not benefitting either. They have to continue investing in research and development of newer and efficient killing machines. The cost will mount and keep mounting as the new technologies and innovative designs require even more sophistication and expensive material. And if the powerful countries go to war, as America has done in Iraq, the cost to the country is mind-boggling. The cost of the war in Iraq for the U.S. is estimated by Joseph Stiglitz the Nobel Laureate to be more than US$ 3 trillion dollars so far. It is going to go on gulping more and more money. Even the U.S. cannot afford to lose this amount of money, especially when victory has not and will not be achieved. Imagine what we can do for the poor and the sick of the world with just a fraction of the 3 trillion.
36. And the whole world is suffering also. Everyone has to spend more money on security, air travel is no longer safe, and lots of money have to be expanded on checking the so-called Muslim terrorists. Far from war against Iraq resulting in the spread of democracy in the Middle East, it has brought about the spread of instability and insecurity to the whole world.
37. War is truly not an option in this modern world. The militarily powerful such as the US and European countries cannot win any war, their sophisticated and costly weapons notwithstanding. This is because the defeat of the enemy, no matter how weak, will not end in victory for the winner. The Governments may surrender and sign a peace treaty but the people will not. They will continue to fight with whatever means they have. Bitter over their countries' defeat and occupation they will not stop fighting.
38. Against these people all the modern weapons, the helicopter gunships, missiles, bombs, rockets, stealth aircrafts and jet fighters, special forces, tanks, warships are quite useless. Once in a while the nationalists might get lucky and destroy a multi-million dollar aircraft and tank.
39. In Vietnam the powerful U.S. military was soundly thrashed by pyjama-clad Viet peasants until the U.S. ran away helter-skelter. In Afghanistan the Taliban successfully confined the NATO forces to certain towns only. In Baghdad, the American and British forces have achieved none of the objectives. Killing Saddam had not resulted in ending the war. "Shock and Awe" have not overawed the Iraqis and forced them into submitting.
40. Surge and new forces have cost more money and more deaths of U.S. soldiers, more mental diseases amongst them with no sign of bringing the war to an end or making Iraq a successful democracy.
41. The rich countries may come up with all kind of costly weapons capable of killing more people efficiently but all these weapons will not win wars against the people determined to fight and preserve their independence.
42. Perhaps the weapons, including nuclear weapons can be employed in a war amongst the militarily powerful. Perhaps they cab be used by the U.S. and Britain against Russia and China. They may be able to pulverize these countries but these countries would also wreak havoc in the aggressor countries. In fact the whole world will be destroyed by war between the powerful countries.
43. The rich and militarily powerful countries should take note of this. All their money, weapons and tactical skills will avail them of nothing. They will lose fighting against the countries weaker than them, and they will suffer death and destruction if they fight against countries which can match their military capability. In the end, they would still achieve nothing.
44. Clearly war is no longer an option, not just because of the massive death and destruction that modern weaponry can inflict but also because the cost of war has gone up so much that even rich countries like the U.S. can be bankrupted. As Joseph Stiglitz has computed the war in Iraq has so far cost the US $ 3 trillion dollars. The U.S. is bankrupt and this war will prevent the U.S. from ever settling its debts. Of course it can just not pay. That is the prerogative of the strong. The belief that the might is right still holds.
45. But as I pointed out, because of the virtual arms race caused by the high pressure sales tactics by arms salesmen, other countries have also become financial strapped. Indeed the whole world is now heading for financial disaster partly because of investing in ever more sophisticated and ever more costly arms. And for what? They are never going to win any war with these weapons.
46. The rise in oil prices are connected with war. And oil prices affect the process of all goods. In other words, the increase in oil prices brings about inflation. The poor of this world will be the ones most affected. But the rich will suffer also. We are seeing this happening now.
47. The wars will be clearly bankrupt the world. And yet the wars will solve none of the problems of humanity, none of the conflicts between nations. The cost in human lives and property is literally killing.
48. Looked at from any angle, war is a great waste of everything. So why are we still going to war? Why are we still killing people and destroying wealth when we are not getting anything from our wars?
49. We claim to be civilized. How civilized is a society where duels and killings are legally accepted as a way of settling quarrels. Would justice be served when the winner usually is the one skilled in killing? The end result must be a society of killers
50. Yet war between nations is actually duel on a grand scale. Seventy million people were killed in the Second World War. Property that was worth trillions of dollars were destroyed. The Allies proclaimed the winners. But what have the winners got to show for all these? Was justice served? Were the people killed brought back to life? Was the huge sums of money expended recovered? Was there any profit for anyone?
51. The answer to all these questions must be resounding "NO". No one gained anything from war. Everyone lost. And the cost in human suffering is inmeasurable.
52. We cannot claim to be civilized when we kill and destroy in order to prove how right we are or how just and fair we are.
53. How long more are going to do this? We are already capable of destroying the whole world. Must we wait until we do this before we stop, before we declare wars as illegal and the people who initiate wars as criminals? By that time you must agree it would be too late. War must be stopped now. War must be regarded as a crime. The people and especially their leaders who resort to war in order to settle disputes between them and others must be regarded as criminals, must be made to face charges in a court of law and be punished appropriately. Until then let us not claim that we are civilised.
54. I say criminalize war and punish the leaders and the people who resort to war in order to settle disputes with other countries.

[Baca]

Paul Findley: Seek Justice, Only Justice

Posted in War & Peace, Iraq, Palestine by Admin on the March 16th, 2006

THE PALESTINE CHRONICLE, MUSLIMNEWSASIA NETWORK, 8 March 2006

In Middle East policy, America ignores injustice, because religion-based passions here at home override even vital national interests. Our bias is not controlled by government officials but by two peculiar, politically powerful religious communities - fundamentalist Christianity, on one hand, and on the other an extreme element of Judaism. Together, they burden our country year after year with an Israel-centric foreign policy that is disastrous to America's vital interests. Both groups have a deep-seated, passionate attachment to the State of Israel, no matter how outrageous its behavior becomes. Both are represented powerfully in Washington and exert a suffocating level of influence throughout America's political system, as well as in almost every other part of our society.

This influence is abetted unwittingly by suicide bombers, professed Muslims who engage in reprehensible violence mainly as a barbaric protest against foreign occupation of their land. In doing so, they defy the rules of Islam and Christianity by taking their lives and the lives of innocent people and thus frustrate the efforts of people who define Islam correctly as a generous, tolerant and peaceful religion. Nearly one-half of the American people harbor false, ugly images of Islam and want the civil liberties of U.S. Muslims curtailed. Most Americans also seem oblivious to the peril before all of us. They are unaware of the flagrant bias in our policies and the price we pay for this bias.

Despite the wonders of the Information Age, few know the truth about how our flawed policies in the Middle East are put in place. Almost everyone who knows the truth is afraid to speak out. This unofficial but effective censorship is deadly. It has unwittingly has led us step by step into deep trouble, even war. Of the two religious communities cited above, the older and more skillful one is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). The newer but much larger one is the fundamentalist Christian community that is guided by a controversial interpretation of the Bible's Book of Revelation.

AIPAC consists almost exclusively of Zionists, activists whose behavior is actually disapproved by the majority of U.S. Jews. My book, "They Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront Israel's Lobby", details the origin, history and tactics of AIPAC.

Ultra-Orthodox Zionists believe their messiah will not arrive until Greater Israel - Biblical Israel - comes into being. This means the incorporation of the entirety of the West Bank and East Jerusalem into Israel proper. In both Israel and the United States, such Zionists exert great political power. They receive U.S. financing, both public and private, and are the primary force that establishes and expands the illegal Jewish settlements that now consign Palestinians to isolated enclaves like those that once existed in apartheid South Africa.

Christian fundamentalists are not as tightly organized as AIPAC, but they consist of more than 50 million members. They are well disciplined on election days and have attained great political power in recent years. They were prominent in Bush's presidential campaigns.

The two communities make strange bedfellows. Judaic doctrine makes no mention of Jesus Christ. Fundamentalist Christian doctrine proclaims that when Christ returns to earth, all Jews will either be converted to Christianity or be destroyed. The two groups are bound tightly together today by an immediate interest - the survival of a strong, expanding Israel as an essential precondition for the arrival on earth of their separate messiahs.

Together, the two communities control U.S. policy in the Middle East. They are so powerful that Congress dutifully approves massive aid to Israel every year with no debate whatever. No mention is made of Israel's continuing record of destroying Palestinian society through military conquest, assassinations and wholesale destruction of lives, homes and means of livelihood. On Capitol Hill, there is no mention of the grave harm this bias causes to U.S. national interests.

Year after year, our government enables Israel to defy the rules of international law and the UN Charter with impunity. Due to media bias, few Americans are aware of this scofflaw conduct, but most other people worldwide, especially Muslims, follow this abuse with mounting anti-American fury. The rage over recently published cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad is thought by many observers to be a spontaneous eruption of anger among Muslims toward the West. Some anger may be spontaneous, but most is grounded in the long-festering bitterness over U.S. complicity in the plight of mostly-Muslim Palestine. In President Bush's campaign against terrorism, he has failed to recognize that 9/11's real Ground Zero was never Manhattan or the Pentagon. It was always Palestine and remains so today.

What motivated the 9/11 assault against America? It was a grisly payback for America's complicity in Israel's bloody assault on Arabs years ago. In several televised statements, Osama bin Laden cited as motives for 9/11 U.S. complicity in Israel's 1982 bombing of Beirut, as well as our subsequent role in Israel's destruction of Palestinian society.

Using U.S.-supplied armor, bombs and bullets, Israel killed more than 18,000 innocent Arabs in Beirut. This provoked worldwide anti-American fury that intensified when Congress immediately voted funds to restore the inventory of munitions Israeli forces consumed in the massacre. I know. I was a Member of Congress when the vote occurred.

The 9/11 calamity and our costly, stumbling wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq are the ugly off-springs of our longstanding complicity. Worldwide resentment against Israel and the United States has deepened with each passing year. President Bush's failure to recognize and redress these Arab grievances is the main reason for the lethal insurgency now underway against our forces in Iraq. This failure quickens our fateful pace as we plunge toward the precipice of a widespread war over religion.

Our best way to pull back from the precipice is to pull U.S. military forces and contractors out of Iraq. Sadly, Bush shows no sign of changing course. Our peril deepened in the wake of 9/11 when Bush received bad advice from Vice-President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, my colleagues years ago in the House of Representatives. Overreacting to 9/11, they convinced the president that the assault made him all-powerful as commander-in-chief and that he had a free rein to ignore Congress and tradition and could change U.S. policies as he wished.

Bush immediately acted the part, proclaiming his right to commit acts of war any place he alone found a threat to our security. He scrapped national sovereignty, the bedrock of the nation state, rammed through a panicky Congress an unpatriotic Patriot Act and pledged to maintain U.S. forces and foreign bases at a level sufficient to police the world.

He initiated inconclusive, stumbling wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and now hints at an assault on Iran. Syria may be next.

I am not an isolationist. The world needs policing, but no single nation state should attempt that role. It is the proper job for a multinational organization which our government should be helping to create. I use plain language. Perhaps what I say troubles you deeply. In these perilous I must speak the truth as I believe it to be.

How did we get in this mess? How do the religious lobbies maintain this tight grip on U.S. policy?

They use America's political system with great skill. They vote. They take part in political campaigns. They contribute generously to candidates who do their bidding and against those who do not. Their most powerful instrument of intimidation is the reckless charge of anti-Semitism. I know the sting. It works. It makes people who know the truth about our complicity cower in silence.

Few Americans know - but all should know - of the silent but effective support of Israel that exists within our government bureaucracy. Almost every office in the executive branch and for congressional committees that has any role in Middle East policy formulation has at least one staff member who takes the personal responsibility of protecting the interests of Israel as each piece of paper passes through his or her desk. My book is replete with examples. Our government is truly Israeli-occupied territory, but few citizens are aware of this reality.
Today's bloody mess started a half-century ago on Capitol Hill when the lobby for Israel first promoted a heavy bias in U.S. policy in the Middle East. Its activities thoroughly intimidated our political institutions and effectively stifled debate. I know firsthand. I was a Member of Congress for 22 years and have watched developments closely ever since.

By silencing dissent, the pro-Israel lobby intimidates not just the Congress but the entire nation. Former Ambassador George W. Ball spoke accurately when he said that Congress behaves like trained poodles, jumping through hoops held by lobbyists for Israel. Senators Charles Percy and Adlai Stevenson and Representatives Paul "Pete" McCloskey, Cynthia McKinney, Earl Hilliard and myself are among those defeated at the polls by candidates heavily financed by pro-Israel forces. Only McKinney later returned to Congress.

Nationally, not just on Capitol Hill, the State of Israel is treated as sacrosanct. It is rare when a word critical of Israel is expressed even in private conversation. This is true in the media, academia, social circles and business communities. Almost everyone, afraid to speak out, has an excuse for silence. Lobby intimidation even suffocates free speech in houses of worship. It should surprise no one that Congress, with hardly a murmur of protest, recently approved resolutions saluting the prime minister of Israel for building high walls and fences that keep Palestinians penned up on their own land like cattle.

I believe 9/11 would not have occurred if the U.S. had refused to support Israel's humiliation and destruction of Palestinian society. Any president of the past 38 years could have brought peace to the Middle East by suspending all aid until Israel withdrew from Arab land it seized in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.

Why did Bush order the invasion of Iraq? Israeli footprints are found every step of the way. U.S. General Anthony Zinni, once Bush’s special emissary to the Middle East, spoke the truth recently when he said Israel and oil are the widely accepted reasons for the invasion. I will add that almost everyone knows that Israel was the stronger of the two reasons. The war in Iraq was for Israeli interests, not American. If we commit acts of war against Iran or Syria, these too will be mainly to help Israel.

The raging insurgency against U.S. forces in Iraq is linked directly to the plight of the Palestinians nearby. How can we expect Iraqis to trust our promise of freedom for them when a few miles away we maintain our abject, decades-long complicity in Israel’s denial of freedom for Palestinians?

The best way to stop both the insurgency in Iraq and the gathering storm of Christendom versus Islam is to suspend all U.S. aid until Israel vacates illegal settlements it has established throughout the West Bank and East Jerusalem and withdraws from Arab territory it has held illegally since June 1967.

In Iraq, we should announce plans for a total withdrawal of the U.S. military and contractor personnel by an early date, stating clearly that the only units exempt from withdrawal would be any that are expressly requested by the Iraqi government and the UN Security Council.
These two announcements would sweep away the dark clouds of religious war and quickly dampen the Iraqi insurgency. They would be greeted with worldwide rejoicing as heralding a dramatic return of U.S. policy to the high ground it once occupied.

Is the scene hopeless? Of course not. We are on the eve of a new election cycle. Every one of us has the opportunity - yes, the responsibility - to speak up at political gatherings, ask precise questions of candidates and demand precise answers. We can write letters to the editor and engage directly in partisan campaigns.

We must reject preemptive war as an instrument of public policy. Supporters of war turn to scripture for misleading inspiration. Let us take our inspiration from Deuteronomy, where God instructed Moses with these words: "Seek justice, only justice." The peril is immediate and great, but it is not too late for justice.

I am 84. I've been on the firing line for justice in U.S. policy in the Middle East for nearly half my life. I do not regret a minute of that long endeavor. I will never give up. Will you help?

-Paul Findley was a Member of Congress, 1961-83, and is the author of five books, the latest being "Silent No More: Confronting America's False Images of Islam". He resides in Jacksonville, Illinois.

[Baca]

CONTAINING CHINA : A FLAWED AGENDA

China has been on the radar screen of US foreign policy makers and political strategists since 1949. That was the year that the Chinese Communist Party seized power in the world's most populous nation through a popular revolution. For the next three decades the United States of America was concerned about curbing the influence of Chinese communism, especially in Asia. However, since the beginning of the nineties it has focused more on ensuring that China does not emerge as a superpower capable of challenging US supremacy and its global hegemony.

In this chapter we shall first show how the US sought to check the spread of Chinese communism. Both the successes and the failures of this enterprise will be examined. We shall then turn to the current, more complex phase in US China relations. On the one hand, corporate America is one of the principal beneficiaries of China's economic dynamism. On the other hand, the political and military elites in the US, deeply perturbed as they are about China's ascendancy, are seeking to curb and contain China's power and influence within the region and in the world. The chapter will conclude that there is no reason to contain China. But there is every reason to check Washington's global hegemony.

Curbing Chinese Communism
Various Moves

For American leaders in 1949 the "loss of China" --- meaning by which the overthrow of the Kuomintang regime of Chiang Kai-shek, a staunch US ally, by the communists --- was a catastrophic blow. It conditioned to a great extent various US moves and manoeuvres in different parts of Asia for the next 20 years or so. It was one of the main reasons for instance behind "President Truman's decision in 1950 to order the Seventh Fleet to defend Taiwan and police the Taiwan Strait..." China was also a factor in explaining General Douglas MacArthur's decision to march north to the Chinese border in 1951 in the midst of the Korean War, thus provoking Chinese intervention. Even US intervention in Vietnam which began in an oblique manner in the fifties and intensified in the early sixties was motivated in part by a fear of China acquiring greater influence in Southeast Asia if North and South Vietnam were united under Ho Chi Minh's communist rule. US involvement in Indonesia in the late fifties till the mid sixties was also shaped to a considerable degree by the China factor. As the Kahins observed in their 1995 work entitled Subversion as Foreign Policy, "To a striking degree the massive involvement of the United States in Indonesia was part of a piece with the composite pattern of anti-communism, loss-of-China prescription, and opposition to neutralism that was so prominent in its relations with other Southeast Asian countries".

The string of military bases that the US either established or reinforced in various Asian countries after 1949 was also in a sense a response to the perceived threat of Chinese Communism. By the end of the sixties, the US had bases in a number of countries from Japan and South Korea to Taiwan and Thailand to South Vietnam and the Philippines. Two of these countries, the Philippines and Thailand were part of a eight nation anti-communist military alliance initiated by the US called the Southeast Asia Treaty Organisation (SEATO). Set up in 1954, SEATO also included (apart from the US), Britain, France, Australia, New Zealand and Pakistan.

At the same time, the US forged close political and economic ties with a whole range of countries in Asia including those that were outside SEATO. Opposition to communism was one of the reasons why some of these countries --- such as Malaysia --- gravitated towards the US. The US for its part attempted to strengthen the economic foundations of these countries --- Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore, among others --- to show the world that capitalism offered a better alternative to communism.

 Investments from the US and other Western capitalist economies, American technologies and easy access to the huge American consumer market were all meant to accelerate the development of anti–communist Asia.

Those governments which were not communist but refused to be drawn into the US's anti-communist alliances, both formal and informal, often earned the wrath of Washington. Two outstanding examples of this were the Sihanouk government in Cambodia and the Sukarno government in Indonesia in the late fifties and sixties. Because of his refusal to join SEATO and his determination to develop ties with China and the Soviet Union while maintaining good relations with the US, Sihanouk became the target of US machinations - specifically CIA engineered manoeuvres - to topple him. Finally, the CIA succeeded in 1970. Similarly, concerted efforts were made by the CIA and successive US Administrations to depose Sukarno whose desire to remain outside both the US and Soviet orbits irked a lot of people in Washington. As with Sihanouk, they eventually managed to oust Sukarno in 1965.

It is worth noting that it was only after Sukarno was overthrown that Washington gave enthusiastic support for the formation of another regional grouping, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), in 1967. In the initial stages, ASEAN brought together five states, namely, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and the Philippines. Unlike, SEATO, ASEAN gave no emphasis to military cooperation. The focus was on economic and cultural cooperation, buttressed by political cooperation aimed at creating peace and stability within the region. However, the five ASEAN states, we should remind ourselves, were staunchly anti-communist. Indeed, right up to 1974, none of them had any diplomatic relations with China. And the US was very keen on making sure that it remained that way since its Vietnam adventure was turning into a mess and it was apparent by the early seventies that the US was on the verge of suffering a major defeat at the hands of the Vietnamese.

Success or Failure?

It is appropriate to ask at this point : did the US succeed in containing the spread of Chinese communist influence in Asia in the fifties right up to the seventies ? US intervention in the Korean War, specifically its provocative stance vis-à-vis China only served to entrench the division between communist North Korea, on the one hand, and South Korea, on the other, which, to all intents and purposes, was a client state of the US. Its massive military involvement in Vietnam could not prevent the unification of North and South Vietnam under communist leadership but a communist leadership which all along had been more nationalist than communist : a critical characteristic of the Vietnamese liberation movement which the political strategists in Washington had missed. As in the case of Vietnam, the US failed to stop communist governments from coming to power in both Laos and Cambodia.

But outside the Korean Peninsula and Indo-China, the US, at first glance, appears to have had some success in keeping much of Asia non-communist. Didn't it help to thwart the rise of the Indonesian Communist Party (PKI), an ally of the Chinese Communist party, by orchestrating a right wing coup and installing a military junta in power in 1965? Didn't the US blunt the appeal of the communist ideology by facilitating --- as we have seen --- the rapid economic development of a number of countries in the region?

While there is certainly a grain of truth in both these rhetorical questions, a closer examination of the situation in each country in Asia will reveal that the main reasons that explain why communism was kept at bay are more complex and contextual. A few examples will suffice. In Indonesia for instance the role played by Islamic organizations in mobilizing mass sentiment against communism --- given its association with atheism in the popular mind --- was a far more crucial factor in the demise of the PKI than the CIA engineered coup itself. Islam also acted as a bulwark against the spread of communism in Malaysia. An ethnic factor perhaps had an even more decisive impact. Since the majority of the communists in the country were Chinese immigrants or descendants of immigrants, the indigenous Malay community viewed the armed communist insurgency as an alien attempt to wrest power from the 'sons of the soil'. Besides, the government had also succeeded in overcoming the underlying political, economic and cultural grievances that had fuelled the insurgency. Similarly, by attending to some of the grievances of the peasantry, the Philippine government especially in the fifties and sixties managed to weaken the communist movement in that country. Catholicism also played a role. In Thailand, communism was never a major challenge. Nonetheless, the overwhelming moral authority of the monarchy ensured that belief systems which were at variance with its notion of order and hierarchy could not develop a mass following.

As for the link between the economic progress of various countries in Asia and the containment of communism, US support was far less important than certain endogenous inputs. In South Korea and Taiwan land reform and state led economic growth accompanied by distribution provided the real impetus for transformation. It is a matter of some irony that both these achievements were not in sync with American style capitalism. In the case of Singapore, an incorruptible, competent leadership capable of planning and executing policies for the people was the single most important factor that created prosperity in the little island republic. Likewise, Malaysia’s economic success was due mainly to a judicious mix of growth and equity achieved over long decades of relative ethnic harmony and political stability.

What all this implies is that neither American economic policies in the region nor its military and political interventions were decisive in checking the spread of communism. The attempt to forge a military alliance to curb the ideology's expansion was also an abysmal failure. SEATO was pronounced dead and laid to rest in 1977. The numerous military bases that the US established in Asia were equally ineffective. If anything, they merely served to incense and antagonise the local population. Okinawa was a case in point. The Clark and Subic bases in the Philippines were closed down in the late eighties partly because of 'people power' .

Containing China
Economic Transformation

It is one of the great ironies of history that after more than 27 years of American military, political and economic efforts to defeat Chinese communism, the ideology, specifically its economic dimension, was vanquished by the Chinese ruling elite itself ! The modernizers within the leadership with Deng Xiaoping at the helm, who managed to wrest power from the dogmatists following the death of Mao Tse Tung and the end of the disastrous Cultural Revolution in 1976, introduced some fundamental changes to the economic system. Private ownership of farms and small and medium sized enterprises was allowed by law; entrepreneurs could retain their profits; private savings were encouraged; and domestic and foreign investments in various sectors of the economy were given a boost. As a result of these changes, much of China was transformed into a market economy.

In the course of the last 25 years this market oriented economy has witnessed phenomenal progress. It has grown at an average rate of 9.5 % per annum for more than two decades, making it the world’s fastest developing economy. Indeed, in terms of purchasing power parity, China is already the world’s second largest economy .

Cheap, quality Chinese goods are found everywhere, from Latin America and Africa to Europe and the United States. China has also become a huge global factory producing goods for some of the biggest multinational corporations in the world. "For example, most Dell Computers sold in the US are made in China, as are the DVD players of Japan's Funai Electric Company."

The East Asia specialist, Chalmers Johnson notes that "China's trade with Europe in 2004 was worth 177.2 billion, with the United States 169.6 billion and with Japan 167.8 billion." It is because China’s trade with the US has been growing rapidly --- by some 34% in 2004 ---- that ports on the west coast such as Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland have become "the three busiest seaports in America".

It goes without saying that big American corporations view China today as a gigantic jar of honey which they have just begun to savour. But there are other influential and powerful actors who are becoming increasingly critical --- and wary---of China. Some of them have drawn up elaborate strategies on how to contain China.

Negative Perceptions: Human Rights

We have attempted to classify these negative perceptions of China into three categories. First, there are criticisms that revolve around China's human rights record. Then, there are those fears about China as a military threat to its neighbours. Finally, there is concern within certain circles that China, because of its growing economic clout, poses the most formidable challenge ever to the United States' global hegemonic power. These three categories are by no means water-tight compartments. A group that condemns China for its suppression of freedom of expression may also harbour misgivings about its alleged military build-up and at the same time may believe that China is preparing itself to become the next superpower. After elucidating the arguments in each of the three categories, we shall subject them to scrutiny.

Accusations about China's gross human rights violations have a long history behind them, dating back to the birth of the communist state in 1949. However, since the economic transformation of China, these allegations have become more specific and more focused. The continuing political dominance of the Chinese Communist Party, the absence of electoral competition and a multi-party system, state control over the media and the judiciary and glaring weaknesses in the observance of the rule of law are some of the issues that human rights caucuses in the US, academics and politicians from both the Republican and Democratic parties often target. In more recent years, some of these groups, reinforced by influential Christian networks have deplored the lack of religious freedom in the country. They point to the curbs and controls imposed by the State upon the Catholic and Protestant Churches and upon the spiritual movement known as the Falun Gong.

There is a strong factual basis to many of the allegations hurled at the Chinese government about its lack of respect for the civil and political rights of the people. It is irrefutably true that the Communist Party controls all the major institutions of state and society. And yet, an objective evaluation of the situation will persuade us that perceptible changes are taking place in China. In certain parts of China, the Party has allowed grassroots elections for village councils to be held. The candidates are individuals without any affiliation to the Party. Some mayors and city councilors organize town hall style meetings where a whole range of issues are debated. Environmental groups have emerged even in rural areas to protest against state projects such as dams that impact adversely upon the lives of vulnerable peasant communities. There are also instances of well educated professionals challenging corrupt public officials in the media and exposing abuses of power. Even in the sphere of religion, 'household' churches that refuse to toe the Communist Party line are tolerated in an environment where all religions, from Buddhism and Taoism to Christianity and Islam are experiencing a revival of sorts. Besides, the teachings of Confucius --- China’s greatest sage --- which were sidelined during the Mao decades have now gained considerable respectability and are offered as university courses.

The unwillingness of the Washington political elite and most human rights advocates in the US to acknowledge that China is gradually embracing certain political and social freedoms has begun to pique Chinese leaders. They suspect that constant attacks upon China's human rights record may be a ploy to discredit the nation so that it will not gain legitimacy and credibility as a leader of the world community. This is one of the reasons why the Chinese government has now chosen to retaliate against US criticisms by publishing its own annual report on US human rights violations.

Negative Perceptions: Military Threat ?

Just as the US accuses China of human rights transgressions, it also often alleges that China poses a military threat to its neighbours. As we have hinted, since Chiang Kai-shek installed himself in Taiwan in 1949, US political, military and security elites have projected the island in the eyes of the world as the primary target of China’s military agenda. It is because of China's aggressive policy towards Taiwan, these elites argue, that tensions rose over the Taiwan Straits in 1954 and 1958 and then again in 1996. The fact that China fired missiles into the sea near two major Taiwanese ports between July 1995 and March 1996 and the US was forced to respond by dispatching the USS Nimitz and the USS Independence shows clearly that Beijing has no qualms about using military force to regain control over Taiwan. If anything, the anti-secession law passed by the National People's Congress in March 2005 which states unequivocally that China would resort to "non-peaceful means" to reunify Taiwan with mainland China after all other means have failed, is conclusive proof of Beijing's intention.

There have been other situations too where Beijing has flexed its muscles, Washington elites point out. It has allegedly adopted a belligerent stance over the Spratly and Paracel islands in the South China Sea. These islands are claimed in part or whole by six other governments, Vietnam, Taiwan, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Indonesia. In fact, China and Vietnam clashed twice, in 1974 over the Paracels and in 1988 over the Spratlys.

All this indicates --- China critics are fond of saying – that China's neighbours are not safe or secure. After all, Beijing has increased its military budget by 12.6 % in 2005, bringing it up to 29 billion dollars. In the last 15 years, its military expenditure has been increasing steadily in the name of the modernisation of its armed forces.

While concern over China's militarisation and the challenge that this poses to the region has been expressed by American leaders of various stripes, it is the neo-conservatives (neo-cons) surrounding President George Bush who have been particularly vocal about it. They are convinced that China is building its military power in order to dominate the rest of Asia. This constitutes "a direct threat to Taiwan and China's other democratic neighbours---and to America's vital interest in a balance of power in Asia" .

China, as one would expect, has a totally different perspective on all the issues pertaining to its alleged military role in Asia. Taiwan is an integral part of China. Right from 1949, the Beijing leadership had made it unambiguously clear to the world that it would never ever tolerate the idea of a separate, independent Taiwan. The United Nations itself conceded to the Chinese view in 1971 when it returned the China seat in the UN to its rightful occupant - after it had been unjustly usurped by Taiwan for 22 years mainly because of the backing of the US. Indeed, when the US established full diplomatic relations with Beijing in 1978, it recognized that indisputable fact in international law that there is only one China and Taiwan is part of it. US Administrations since then have by and large accepted this political reality --- except that the Bush presidency, it is obvious, is less enthusiastic about it than its predecessors . Be that as it may, as far as international law and established political and diplomatic norms are concerned, China has every right to ensure that its territorial integrity and national sovereignty are respected, even if that means using force - as a last resort - to bring about the reunification of Taiwan with mainland China.

By the same measure, China's territorial claims over the Spratlys and the Paracels by themselves are no indication of its military ambitions in the region. A cursory study of Chinese history will reveal that the Chinese have always been preoccupied with the sanctity of their borders and have from time to time gone to war to enforce their territorial claims. This is what happened for instance in the early part of the fifteenth century during the period of the Ming Dynasty when the Chinese armada – the biggest and the most advanced in the world at that time --- embarked upon a series of global voyages under the famous Admiral, Zheng He. The only naval battles that the armada was involved in were confined to areas that were contiguous to China's borders --- in the Spratlys and Paracels; in parts of northern Vietnam; and in Yunnan. From other parts of Southeast Asia what the Chinese kingdom expected was an acknowledgement of its political suzerainty. This is why Zheng He who went right up to East Africa and Arabia and perhaps even further did not use the formidable naval power at his command to conquer alien territory or to establish bases on foreign soil . Fast forward to the twentieth century, even China’s brief war with India in 1962 was also about border regions and boundaries.

Based partly upon its historical record and partly upon its current political conduct in Asia, Beijing has always maintained that its neighbours have nothing to fear from its increased military spending which has been prompted largely by the US stance vis-a-vis Taiwan. Even with these increases, China’s military expenditure of 29 billion dollars for 2005 amounted to a fraction of the US military budget of 400 billion for the same year. By way of comparison, Japan's military expenditure in 2005 came up to 47 billion dollars.

It is not China that has been belligerent towards its neighbours. It is the US that has been aggressive towards China. In April 2001 for instance a US plane spying upon a Chinese battleship collided with a Chinese military aircraft in mid-air resulting in the death of its pilot. Beijing considered it an act of provocation but avoided a confrontation with the US over the incident . For even more compelling evidence of the US’s belligerent attitude towards China, one has to look at its ballistic missile defence (BMD) programme. The BMD programme is essentially "a new space-based, high-tech grand strategy for transforming the military and securing global dominance for decades to come." The proponents of BMD such as the US Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, see China as one of the principal hurdles to total US global dominance and are convinced that an ultra sophisticated weapons programme will deter the former from even contemplating challenging the latter. To contain China, Rumsfeld and others in the Bush Administration are now encouraging some of China's neighbours to strengthen their military muscles. Japan has been asked to set aside its pacifist Constitution and accelerate its rearmament. Given the uneasiness between Japan and China which erupted yet again in April 2005 over Japan's distorted presentation of its massacre of the Chinese people before and during the second world war in a school text, a rearmed Japan can only send shivers down the Chinese spine. The US has also promised India that it will extend whatever help it can to enable China’s southern neighour to become a major world power.

There is no doubt at all that containing China militarily is high up on Washington’s Asian agenda. This is not because China is a threat to any of its neighbours or to the US. Projecting China as a military threat is part of the US strategy of perpetuating its own military dominance. It is to ensure that any nation that is not an ally or a client that may have some military potential is clubbed and clobbered before it raises its head. After all, for the neo-cons, US global hegemony is the prized trophy of American victory in the cold war. It is a trophy they would want to hold on to at all costs. Besides, military hegemony also means ever escalating military expenditure and bigger and bigger contracts for the arms merchants.

Negative Perceptions: Economic Clout

This brings us to the third major argument for containing China propounded by the neo-cons and their ilk. It is because of China's rapid economic ascendancy that the US feels threatened. We have already caught a glimpse of China's economic dynamism. What we have yet to fathom is why this economic dynamism is viewed with so much trepidation in certain circles.

For some years now in their burgeoning bilateral trade, the US has been recording larger and larger deficits as against China's bigger and bigger surpluses. In 2004 for instance China registered a 162 billion dollar trade surplus while for June 2005 the figure was 17.6 billion. These surpluses are due mainly to US imports of cheap Chinese textiles and apparel.

Since these huge trade deficits result in the loss of manufacturing jobs, quite a bit of anger has developed against China among both American workers and some owners of capital. They feel that it is because the Chinese currency, the Yuan, is grossly undervalued---its July 2005 de-pegging from the dollar and slight appreciation notwithstanding --- that China is able to export its goods so cheaply. They argue that China should therefore allow the Yuan to appreciate much more.

America's trade deficit has been exacerbated by its federal budget deficit. This deficit began to grow under the Reagan presidency in the eighties and was caused to a great extent by his tax cuts and military expenditure . This twin deficit - trade and budget - is primarily responsible for the US's massive debt which has worsened under Bush. As of 15 August 2005, its outstanding public debt stood at more than 7.9 trillion dollars. The US today is the world’s largest debtor nation. A substantial chunk of this debt is owed to countries in East Asia such as Japan, China, South Korea and Taiwan. This is yet another reason why the US feels that it has become increasingly vulnerable to Chinese economic power.

To add to these woes of the US economy, China is attempting to buy up American multinational corporations. The most high profile of these was the bid by the China National Offshore Oil Corps (CNOOC) to take over the giant American oil company, UNOCAL. Though the CNOOC offered a better price – 18.5 billion dollars - than its American rival, Chevron, both the US House of Representatives and the US Senate went all out to stop the purchase. The failure of the Chinese take-over bid shows that the American political elite has become extremely alert to what they perceive as China's looming economic challenge.

There is yet another related aspect of China's present economic drive which has set alarm bells ringing in Washington. Since the Chinese economy is expanding rapidly, its energy needs have increased by leaps and bounds---which was one of the reasons behind its UNOCAL bid. But more than purchasing foreign oil companies, the Chinese strategy is to forge agreements and establish solid economic links with energy producing countries and regions. China has very good relations with a number of such countries in the African continent which supplies China with almost one third of its oil needs. Latin America is another region of the world where the Chinese are active finalizing sales agreements. They have agreed "with Brazil's state controlled oil company to finance a $1.3 billion gas pipeline between Rio de Janeiro and Bahia once technical studies are completed". Under new agreements made with the government of Venezuela "China will be allowed to operate 15 mature oil fields in eastern Venezuela. China will invest around $350 million to extract oil and another $ 60 million in natural gas wells" . In September 2004, China and Kazakhstan entered into a $ 3.5 billion pipeline agreement. Even more significant, on the 28th of October last year, Beijing and Tehran signed a $100 billion dollar agreement which "entails the annual export of some 10 million tons of Iranian liquefied natural gas (LNG) for a 25 year period, as well as the participation, by China's state oil company, in such projects as exploration and drilling, petrochemical and gas industries, pipelines, services and the like" . At the same time Iran will also be exporting 150,000 barrels of crude oil per day to China for 25 years at market prices. Needless to say, these newly forged Beijing-Tehran links have created a great deal of consternation in Washington. Washington is equally dismayed that its long time ally, Saudi Arabia, has granted to a Chinese oil company "the right to explore for natural gas in Saudi Arabia's al-Khali Basin and Saudi Arabia has agreed to build a refinery for natural gas in Fujian (China) in exchange for Chinese investment in Saudi Arabia's bauxite and phosphate industry".

How has Beijing itself defended its trade, investment and economic ventures in the last few years? It rightly attributes its penetration of the American and other markets to its ability to produce cheap but quality goods and products which cater to consumer tastes. It is able to do this for an obvious reason : an abundance of skilled, productive labour and not because of its currency per se. Likewise, China views its quest for energy as a legitimate economic activity. It is seeking access to oil and gas. It has no intention of controlling the level of production or the pattern of distribution of these resources which it recognizes is the sole prerogative of the nation which owns them.

This is the nub of the matter. Unlike China, the US has, for the last so many decades, sought to control, directly or indirectly, the production and distribution of oil and gas at some of the most strategic energy centers on earth. It explains to a great extent why it has embarked upon wars, established military bases, propped up puppet regimes and manipulated politics in certain regions. This is especially true of its role in the Middle East---the world's most important oil exporting region --- since the second world war. From the overthrow of Prime Minister Mohamed Mossadegh in oil rich Iran in 1953 to the invasion and occupation of oil rich Iraq in 2003, it is the same old story of the assertion and re-assertion of hegemonic power over and over again. There is no need to repeat that it is because of its determination to perpetuate and expand its global hegemony that Washington has deliberately chosen to portray China's economic ascendancy as a threat to its well-being. China, on the other hand, has tried on a number of occasions to assure the US that its rise is not a threat to anyone. As one of its leaders put it recently, "China's development is an opportunity instead of a threat to the world. That is becoming the consensus of the international community."

Consequences... and Conclusion

If, in spite of Chinese assurances, Washington continues to regard Beijing as a threat that should be contained economically, politically and militarily, it is quite conceivable that tensions between the two nations will increase rapidly. In such a situation, Taiwan could be the flash point of an actual conflict. Other Asian nations might be drawn into the conflagration. Japan is a prime candidate. So is South Korea. Even India - the present thaw in Sino-Indian relations notwithstanding --- could gravitate towards Washington in the event of a Sino-US conflict. ASEAN states would also be forced to take sides.

Of course, there are analysts who argue that a war between the US and China is most unlikely because of the power and potency of globalisation. As we have seen, American investments are flowing into China and vice versa. Bilateral trade is increasing. Technology transfers are multiplying. China, in other words, is becoming more and more integrated into the Washington helmed global economy. As one of these analysts puts it, "That fundamental reality of the global economy explains why we won't be going to war with China. The Pentagon can plan for all it wants, but it does so purely within the sterile logic of war, and not with any logical reference to the larger flows of globalization".

It is doubtful whether globalisation alone will be enough to dissuade the Pentagon, the neo-cons and other influential actors and lobbyists in Washington from pursuing their agenda of curbing and controlling China. For containing China, as we have shown, is not just a question of putting China in its place. It is, we reiterate, a camouflage for perpetuating and enhancing US global hegemony. It is a goal which is driven by its own logic - the logic of power. Hegemony seekers like the neo-cons will not subordinate this passionate commitment of theirs to other considerations. In fact, this is explicitly articulated in Washington's infamous National Security Strategy of September 2002 which makes it clear that the US will not brook any challenge to its global hegemony - an hegemony which it views as permanent and perennial.

This is why the root of the problem that confronts humankind today is Washington's global hegemony, not China's ascendancy. It is checking Washington's hegemony, not containing China, that is the real challenge facing us all at this hour.

How will we respond to this global challenge?


References

Afrasiabi, Kaveh L (2004), China Rocks the Geopolitical Middle East Asia Times 6 November.
Amnesty International Report (2004), China London : Amnesty International Publications.
Barnett, Thomas P. M. (2004), The Pentagon's New Map (New York : Berkley Books.
Ching, Frank (2005), China may have to think again on Africa 14 July.
Falk, Richard (2004), America's Imperial Geopolitics The Declining World Order (New York and London: Routledge.
Internet Posting (2005), US National Debt Clock 15 August.
Johnson, Chalmers (2002), The Costs and Consequences of American Empire London: TimeWarner Books.
Johnson, Chalmers (2004), The Sorrows of Empire United Kingdom : Verso.
Johnson, Chalmers (2005), No Longer the "Lone" Superpower Internet Posting Common Dreams News Center 15 March.
Johnson, Chalmers No Longer the "Lone".
Kahin, Audrey R and Kahin, George McT. (1997), Subversion as Foreign Policy Seattle and London : University of Washington Press.
Kaur, Hardev (2005), On the threshold of a new Asian century 15 April.
Munro, Ross H. (2000), China: The Challenge of a Rising Power in Present Dangers Crisis and Opportunity in American Foreign and Defense policy Robert Kagan and William Kristol (Editors) San Francisco : Encounter Books.
Muzaffar, Chandra (2003), Muslims Dialogue Terror (Malaysia : International Movement for a Just World.
Muzaffar, Chandra (2004), The Interface between Southeast Asia and the US : A Contemporary Analysis. Paper presented at an international conference on the theme Their America : The US in the Eyes of the Rest of the World organized by the New School in New York City 18-19 October.
New Straits Times (2005), China says its rise is not a threat 29 July.
New Straits Times (2005), Why Beijing wants to take over Unocal 28 June.
New Straits Times (Malaysia) (2001), Jiang blames US for collision 4 April.
New Straits Times (Malaysia) (2005), China passes anti-secession Bill 15 March.
New York Times (2004), 8 January.
Power and Interest News Report (2005), Setting the Stage for a New Cold War : China's Quest for Energy Security 3 March.
Report (2005), The Human Rights Record of the United States in 2004 Beijing: State Council of the People’s Republic of China.
San Francisco Chronicle (2005), 13 August.
Sheridan, Greg, (2005), India, US make a tectonic move The Australian 23 July.
Time (2005), A New China Rises 27 June.
Wade, Geoff This view of Admiral Zheng He's voyages is now being challenged by certain biased Western historians who are out to present Chinese naval power in the fifteenth century as 'imperialistic' and 'militaristic'. See for instance article at www.ari.nus.edu.sg/docs/wps/wps04_031.pdf

Paper presented on "Containing China - a Flawed Agenda" at Workshop on Searching for Peace & Equitability in the Post – 9.11 World: Exploring Alternatives for Japan and Australia' at Nanzan University, Nagoya, Japan on 14 September 2005.
[Baca]

THE EMPIRE

 What it is and What it Means for all of Us

Chandra Muzaffar
A global empire is in the making : the first global empire in history.

Military Power

Like other empires in the past, this empire is also being forged through the force of arms. The US today commands overwhelming military power. It is not only more powerful than any other nation on earth. Its strength exceeds that of the next 14 militarily powerful states put together. There has never been a military power as formidable as the US in history. No less than 800 US military bases garrison the globe. Its military strength extends from the depths of the ocean to the outer reaches of space. It aims for 'total spectrum dominance'.

It is because of its massive, mammoth military power that Washington feels that it can disregard international law --- as it did in the invasion of Iraq in March 2003. Even the servile and subservient Kofi Annan(United Nations Secretary-General) was compelled to declare that the war was illegal, albeit a year after the invasion.

Again, it is because of its military power that the US has bestowed upon itself the mantle of exceptionalism. It has demanded, and has secured, from a number of countries the right to exempt its soldiers from legal prosecution if they are involved in wrongdoings in the course of discharging their duties in foreign lands under the auspices of the UN or in other capacities. What this means is that even if a country is a signatory to the Rome Statute and upholds the International Criminal Court, it cannot haul American soldiers to Court. The US itself is vehemently opposed to the ICC.

Military power is also one of the reasons why in global politics Washington has chosen the path of unilateralism. With a few of its allies and clients in tow, it elects to do what it deems is right in the global arena without any regard for international public opinion. This is exactly what it did in the Iraq episode. It decided to invade and occupy a sovereign nation even though the people of the world were against its action, even though the UN refused to endorse its decision. Because it has opted for unilateralism over multilateralism and prefers coercion to negotiation, the US has been accused of fascism in international politics.

Iraq is also proof of how military power is used to gain control over a critical economic resource, namely, oil. Even in the case of Afghanistan military power was used to first topple the Taliban regime following which the US extended its tentacles to the five Central Asian republics. Initially, in three of those republics it quickly established military bases. It now exercises effective control over the oil wealth of the entire Central Asian-Caspian Sea region. Military power has also been utilized to oversee strategic sea routes in order to safeguard American trade, investments and markets. In short, military power is an essential pre-requisite for the protection of the entire Washington helmed neo-liberal capitalist system with its Multinational Corporations (MNCs) and Transnational Corporations (TNCs), banks, financial markets, currency dealers and commodity speculators. This is what Thomas Friedman, one of the staunchest defenders of the American Empire, meant when he lauded the iron fist as an important pre-condition for the functioning of the hidden hand.

Entertainment Power

But it is not just through military power that the Empire is being built. The United States' entertainment industry has always played a very big role in shaping popular attitudes both within and without the nation. Through films and videos, music and songs, cartoons and comic strips, the US is projected as a champion of freedom and democracy, a land of opportunity and prosperity, a nation which values talent and accomplishment. Over the years, the US, especially for the foreigner, has come to be associated with an alluring lifestyle built around personal liberty and individual success. No wonder entertainment products constitute the US's biggest exports !

Thus there is hard power---military power---and soft power---entertainment power---that are both being harnessed to build the Empire. To put it in another form, there is stark power and subtle power. As we have seen, subtle power depends upon stark power. The reverse is also true. Subtle power makes stark power palatable. After exposing Vietnamese youth to American pop culture for a couple of decades, US warships are now re-visiting Vietnamese ports.

Genesis ; Obstacles

At this point we should pause and ask: How did the American Empire grow and develop? Of all the Western colonial empires involved in the second world war, it was only the US that emerged relatively unscathed. Even the victors of that war like Britain were financially devastated. This meant that in 1945 it was only the US that was in a position to lead the world. And the US chose to demonstrate its leadership of the world in two ways.

It forced the world to acknowledge that only the US commanded overwhelming military power. It dropped two atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on the 6th and the 9th of August 1945 respectively, killing 340,000 men, women and children. Since there is compelling evidence now to show that Japan was on the point of collapse and surrender a couple of months before the bombs were dropped, the only real reason for the bombings appears to have been the desire to prove to the world that the US was an invincible military power and that everyone should take notice of the fact.

At the same time, the US helped to establish a number of international institutions which would shape the world according to its vision. The most notable of these was of course the UN founded in 1945 which was to be led by the US and its four allies at that time (Britain, France, the Soviet Union and China) all of which were given the veto power. Before that in 1944, the US had launched the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). In 1947, it initiated the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT).

However, Washington's plan to dominate the world with the assistance of its allies was short-lived. By 1949, the Soviet Union was in effective political and military control of Eastern Europe. Soviet style communism was the reigning ideology in the region. Europe was now split into states professing capitalist democracy in the West and states aligned to the Soviet Union in the East with a bifurcated Germany epitomizing the divide. The cold war had begun. 1949 is also significant in the sense that it was the year that the Chinese Communist Party under the leadership of Mao Tze-Tung seized power through a people's revolution. As with the Soviet Union, the US now regarded China as an adversary. With the emergence of two powerful communist states with their respective supporters, it had become more difficult for the US to push ahead with its vision of the world.

There was another phenomenon which began to unfold from the late forties which also affected Washington's drive for dominance or hegemony. A number of colonized states in Asia and then Africa achieved their independence through the fifties and sixties. These countries did not want to be subservient to the US---or to the Soviet Union for that matter. Some of them came together in Bandung, Indonesia, under the leadership of men like Sukarno(of Indonesia), Jawaharlal Nehru (of India), Chou En-Lai (of China) and Gamal Nasser (of Egypt) to proclaim their collective determination to defend their national independence and sovereignty on the basis of the Bandung Principles. Asian and African nationalism, it was obvious, was yet another obstacle to Washington's Empire. If anything, nationalist sentiment was further consolidated through the formation of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) in 1961 which included almost all the states that initiated Bandung, with the exception of China.

The challenge posed by communism, on the one hand, and nationalism, on the other, to Washington and its allies merged in the valiant struggle of the Vietnamese people under Ho Chi-Minh to restore their integrity and independence. After a struggle that lasted more than ten years, they succeeded in defeating US aggression and occupation. The victory of the Vietnamese people was undoubtedly one of the high points in the resistance to American imperialism as it spread its wings to different parts of the world in the decades following the second world war.

There were other important though less dramatic events from the late fifties to the late seventies which showed that there were hurdles in the path of US hegemony. Cuba under Fidel Castro asserted its independence from Washington in 1959 through a people oriented revolution. A couple of other Latin American states made less successful attempts at preserving their sovereignty. In Africa, Julius Nyerere tried to chart an autonomous path to development for his country, Tanzania. From its Independence in 1947 right up to the early eighties, India held on to a non-aligned foreign policy buttressed by a certain degree of economic nationalism.

Even more significant, in the Middle East, countries such as Libya and Iraq which had nationalized their oil, working together with the Saudi monarch, King Faisal, revitalized the Organzation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) into a powerful cartel which succeeded partially at least in breaking the grip that Western oil companies had hitherto exercised over petroleum prices. The economic power that OPEC commanded in the mid seventies, limited though it was, enabled countries of the South to articulate their agendas in the UN and other world bodies with a sense of confidence. Proposals for a New International Information Order (NIIO) and a New International Economic Order (NIEO) were products of that era.

The Tide Turns

Nonetheless, even as the South was demanding justice in the international system, the tide was beginning to turn. For one thing, anti-colonialism---the glue that held together the newly independent states of Asia and Africa---no longer had the impact it generated in the immediate post-war decades. As they grappled with the myriad challenges of economic development and social transformation, different states discovered that their interests and aspirations varied. Given the different rates of progress of different states, their interests became even more divergent. To make matters worse, a number of the states that belonged to NAM aligned themselves to either the US bloc or the Soviet bloc and as a result weakened non-aligned solidarity. Then there were the inter-state wars and conflicts---some of which were US-Soviet proxy battles --- that further emasculated the South. One of the earliest of such wars was the brief Sino-Indian border clash in 1962. But the most damaging was perhaps the Iraq-Iran conflict from 1980 to 1988.

We need not discuss in depth the reasons for the war. Suffice to know that fear among the Gulf Rulers that the anti monarchical Iranian Revolution of 1979 would undermine their authority; US antagonism towards the anti American Iranian ruling elite which had overthrown the pro-US Shah; Soviet suspicion of a religious based revolution; and Saddam Hussein’s ambitious desire to assume the mantle of Arab leadership after Nasser's death, all served to instigate Iraq to launch an unprovoked assault upon Iran. The war between two leading OPEC members sapped the dynamic strength of the organization much to the delight of Washington. In fact, there is substantial evidence to suggest that Washington provided Saddam with tangible support in the form of military intelligence. The war also had a negative impact upon both NAM and the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) since Iraq and Iran were, and are, members of the two outfits.

Needless to say, the Iraq-Iran conflict, against the backdrop of all the other trends we have noted affecting the South, created a situation that was specially favourable to Washington. It was made even more favourable with the collapse of the Soviet Union. As with any cataclysmic change of this sort, a variety of factors would explain the demise of the Soviet system in 1991. The ignominious Soviet defeat in Afghanistan at the hands of the Mujahideen had grave repercussions for the moral authority of both the Soviet state and the Soviet army. The defeat reverberated in not only the Muslim republics within the Soviet Union but it also indirectly encouraged the East European states in the Soviet bloc to throw off the Soviet yoke and to intensify their campaign for democracy. Of course, in the midst of all this, US and Western propaganda against the Soviet system and communism also played a role. Besides that, Mikhail Gorbachev's attempt at opening up and restructuring the system through glasnost and perestroika had the unintended effect of weakening the authority of the Soviet leadership. But most of all the inherent weaknesses within the Soviet system---its inability to respond to changing and growing consumer demands; its inefficiency; its declining productivity; its over-emphasis upon military technology; its lack of accountability; its suppression of dissent --- were the more important causes of the collapse of the Soviet system. Even before the collapse, the cold war had come to an end---in 1989 --- largely through the efforts of Gorbachev.

Thus, by the end of the eighties and the early nineties, communism and nationalism, the two major forces which stymied the US drive for global hegemony were in no position to challenge Washington. But there was another challenge looming on the horizon which we had alluded to in different contexts. The Iranian Revolution of 1979 thrust Islam to the fore of both national and international politics. Likewise, the Mujahideen's victory over the Soviet army in 1989 underscored the ability of an Islamic resistance movement to defeat a superpower. Though the larger significance of both these events was not immediately obvious, the roles that Islamic movements are playing today in offering different modes of resistance to hegemony cannot be properly understood without reflecting upon 1979 and 1989. We shall return to this later.

In the meantime, let us remind ourselves that with communism and nationalism out of the way, the US was able to project itself --- for a second time --- as the harbinger of a new world order. And it did so in grand style. It mobilized an impressive array of governments under its leadership to force the Iraqi army out of Kuwait----which Saddam had invaded in violation of international norms on 2 August 1990. This US led coalition of thirty two states was a demonstration of the power and influence Washington commanded after the end of the cold war. Washington had no contenders for global leadership. It was the sole superpower of the day.

It was around this time---in early 1991 --- that some of the people associated with President Bush Senior tried to convince him that the US should seize the moment and ensure that its hegemonic standing as the world’s only superpower is permanent and perennial. Before Bush Senior could move in that direction, he was booted out of office. The advocates of total, absolute hegemony had to bid their time.

Bush’s successor, Bill Clinton, was also acutely conscious of the fact that the US was now the peerless leader of the world. His military forays into Iraq, Afghanistan and Sudan showed that he was prepared to use and abuse US power to advance its global interests. But Clinton was not willing to go all the way : from time to time he took into consideration the views of his allies, the positions adopted by other global actors and the realities of the international environment.

The Neo-Cons and other Vested Interests

With the ascendancy of George Bush Junior in 2000, the situation began to change. The neo-conservatives (neo-cons) around him --- men like Paul Wolfowitz, John Bolton, Douglas Feith, Eliot Abrams and Richard Perle some of whom had worked for his father---have a blueprint for transforming the world. The US, they are convinced, should use its enormous military power to ensure it remains dominant forever. It should be so overwhelmingly powerful that no other nation or combination of nations would even contemplate challenging the US for global supremacy. US supremacy in turn would reinforce Israel’s position to such an extent that it would be able to dominate and control the Middle East politically and militarily. The Neo-Cons incidentally are all Zionists. Israeli and US hegemony would also help to ensure that they exercise some control over the supply of Middle East oil and indeed oil from other regions of the world through safe and secure sea routes which would be under their watch. Of course, in order to gain total control over the Middle East and the world, the Neo-Cons will camouflage their real motives by arguing that their mission is to deliver freedom and democracy to people everywhere.

The 911 carnage in a sense provided the Neo-Cons with the excuse to embark upon their mission. Since terrorists allegedly opposed to freedom and democracy are hell-bent on destroying the American way of life, the Bush Administration is justified in making the US and the world safe for everyone by fighting terrorism. For the Neo-Cons this is the justification for the US attack on Afghanistan and the ouster of the Taliban regime which provided sanctuary to the Al-Qaeda terrorist network under Osama bin Laden. What is concealed from the public is how US control over Afghanistan has facilitated --- as we have seen---access to huge oil resources in the surrounding regions. Similarly, Saddam Hussein had to be overthrown to prevent him from allowing terrorist networks to acquire the weapons of mass destruction that he allegedly possessed. Though the invaders of Iraq now acknowledge that Saddam had no WMDs and there were no terrorist cells in Iraq before the invasion, they insist that their action was justified because it led to the elimination of a tyrant who oppressed his people. But they will not admit that gaining control over the world's second largest petroleum resource was a major consideration just as getting rid of a regime that was totally opposed to Israel was a primary motivation. Indeed, it is because of the Neo-Cons' obsession with Israel’s total, absolute security---which can only be achieved through Tel Aviv’s hegemonic power over the region --- that moves are now being planned against Syria and Iran. More than any other group in Washington, it is the Neo-Cons, and of course the Israeli elite, who want to cripple Tehran’s ability to produce nuclear energy.

Apart from the Neo-Cons, the other ideological group that is committed to US hegemony and the American Empire is the Christian Right. A global American Empire which has total control over the Middle East in particular, will, in their view, guarantee Israel's future. And a dominant and triumphant Israel is the pre-requisite for the return of the Messiah. When the Messiah returns, influential elements in the Christian Right reckon, the whole world will embrace Christianity ! In the mean time, Washington and Tel Aviv should use their military power to eliminate all those who threaten Israel's security in any way.

However outlandish the Christian Right may sound, one should not dismiss them outright. A significant segment of the Christian population in the US --- some would estimate it at forty percent --- it is said subscribe to Christian Right ideas of this sort. Besides, there are influential lobbies and important political leaders in Washington who would be seen as part and parcel of the Christian Right.

There are other interest groups associated with the petroleum companies, the arms industry, business corporations, the banks and the finance networks who may also have a stake in the Empire. American global hegemony may enhance their wealth and expand their opportunities. But there may also be elements in all these sectors of the economy who may be uneasy with the creation of an Empire which is bound to generate tension, instability and, in the ultimate analysis, perpetual chaos.

The Empire has also some enthusiastic advocates outside the US. Like the empire builders in the US, they are averse to using the term 'Empire'. But it is obvious from their support for, and participation in, the hegemonic designs of the Neo-Cons that they believe in the US domination of the world. The Israeli elite and perhaps even a sizeable section of the Jewish-Israeli population would espouse US hegemony. The British ruling elite has clearly chosen to identify itself with the Empire. The Empire would also resonate with elites in Canberra, Tokyo, Manila, Singapore and perhaps certain other capitals.

Impact ; Consequences.

What has been the impact of this attempt to build a global empire? What have been the consequences?

The colossal loss of human lives is undoubtedly the most tragic consequence of the attempt to build an Empire. In both the Afghan and Iraq wars tens of thousands have been killed. According to one source, since the invasion of Iraq, about 100,000 civilians have died most of them at the hands of the occupying forces.

We have observed that the drive towards global hegemony has been accompanied by the rise of global authoritarianism. A corollary to this is the introduction of restrictive, sometimes repressive laws to fight terrorism even in the established democracies such as Britain, the US and Australia. It is ironical that the Empire that seeks to spread freedom and democracy has created conditions that have led to the erosion of civil and political liberties in a number of places.

An even more horrendous manifestation of the strangulation of liberty would be the numerous instances of torture and abuse in some notorious prisons and detention centres managed by the Empire. Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib would be but two such examples. Evidence is now emerging that the US's Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has even established a whole network of prisons in different parts of the world where some of the well known leaders of Al-Qaeda are detained indefinitely without recourse to legal counsel or to a fair trial.

The Empire has also in a sense undermined some of the fundamental tenets of national sovereignty. Sovereign governments no longer exercise ultimate authority on matters pertaining to national security. US intelligence services not only have full access to internal security records of most governments but also sometimes dictate to them on how to act on a certain matter.

There is yet another consequence of empire that deserves to be highlighted. Since neo-liberal capitalism is the economic ideology of the Empire, the empire builders are determined to use their overwhelming power to pursue their agenda of liberalization, deregulation and privatization which has led to a widening of economic and social disparities in individual countries and at the global level. A UN report published in September 2005 for instance shows that the top 20 percent of the world population residing mainly in the North owns and controls 80 percent of global wealth while the bottom 80 percent living in the South owns and controls only 20 percent. It also noted that the situation is getting much worse for the global poor. In fact, since empire building began in earnest 3 or 4 years ago there has been an even greater drive to force countries in the South to accept terms in global trade, technology and investments which are clearly detrimental to their interests.

The push for Empire has also widened the chasm between Washington on the one hand and the Muslim masses on the other. The first two countries to be attacked by the Empire were Muslim; the next two on the hit list are also likely to be Muslim. Since most of the oil that is bought and sold in the world flows beneath the feet of Muslims they know that the Empire’s desire to control the commodity is one of the reasons why they have come into conflict with the latter. The Empire's other agenda - re-shaping the Middle East to ensure Israeli hegemony---is perhaps an even more potent cause of conflict as recent events have shown. To ensure Israeli hegemony, Muslims realize that the legitimate struggle of the Palestinians for a just peace will not be allowed to bear fruit. At the most, the Neo-Cons, the Christian Right and other interest groups may tolerate the creation of a Palestinian Bantustan on Gaza and a small portion of the West Bank under Israel's effective control. For Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims everywhere this would be an unjust and immoral solution. It will only spawn more anger and antagonism towards Washington and Tel Aviv.

There is also another reason why relations between Washington and the Muslim world have deteriorated dramatically since 911 and the drive for global hegemony. In the name of fighting terrorism, Muslims in a number of Western countries are routinely hounded and harassed and subjected to a great deal of intimidation and humiliation. The ease with which a segment of the media, certain Christian theologians and some politicians in the US in particular equate Muslims with terrorism has reinforced the stereotyping and stigmatization of the community. Of course, typecasting Muslims as terrorists or as people who are prone to violence has a long history behind it. It is at the crux of an ancient phenomenon called Islamophobia which in the last four years has witnessed a huge revival in the West. Even in some non-Western societies Islamophobia is beginning to present itself.

Terrorism and Al-Qaeda.

By criticizing the stigmatization of Muslims and by lamenting the pervasiveness of Islamophobia, one is not denying that there are fringe groups in the Muslim world who resort to violence and terror in their quest for justice. Al-Qaeda is one such group. It came into prominence in 1991 when it lambasted the stationing of American troops in Saudi Arabia which it considered an act of sacrilege since the land was the home of Islam’s two holiest shrines. In 1996, Al-Qaeda launched a bomb attack at the King Abdul Aziz Air Base in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia killing nineteen American soldiers. Al-Qaeda has been associated with other attacks since then --- ; against American Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998; against an American warship in Yemen in 2000. The climax was the 911 attack on the World Trade Centre (WTC) in New York and the Pentagon in Washington which killed a total of almost 3000 people, mostly civilians. Since 911, Al-Qaeda is also alleged to have staged the Madrid bombing in March 2004 and the London bombing of 7 July 2005.

If the conscious, deliberate targeting of civilians is part of Al-Qaeda's strategy to fight the injustices perpetrated by the US and its allies, it has embarked upon an approach which Islam would condemn as heinous and barbaric. Islam does not permit the killing of civilians or non-combatants in pursuit of any cause, however noble. This is why immediately after 911 a number of leading Muslim theologians from all over the world condemned the dastardly deed in the strongest language possible. The Madrid and London bombings and other similar incidents involving civilians have also evoked condemnations from Muslims of all shades.

There are other dimensions of Al-Qaeda's belief system which mainstream Muslims would reject as inimical to Islamic teachings. Al-Qaeda adheres to a simplistic dichotomization of the world into Muslims and infidels. It has an exclusive rather than an inclusive view of the religion and its message. It follows from this that Al-Qaeda has a pejorative perception of people of other faiths. It justifies the systematic discrimination of women in public life. Its interpretation of Islamic jurisprudence is dogmatic and often atavistic. Al-Qaeda's reading of Islam’s basic text ---- the Quran -- is literal and outmoded.

Al-Qaeda subscribes to this particular view of Islam because of the influence of Wahabism. Wahabism is a reference to an ideological strain that developed within Islam in parts of Saudi Arabia from the eighteenth century onwards which was characterized by an extreme puritanical attitude. As time went on Wahabism became more and more doctrinaire. It had some influence upon elements within the Saudi royal family and the Saudi elite in general.

When the Saudi ruling class wanted to counter the impact of the Iranian revolution amongst Muslims, it was this Wahabist version of Islam that it exported to other parts of the world. Groups within the Mujahideen in Afghanistan who were fighting the Soviet occupation of their country embraced Wahabism. The Saudi rulers in any case were also financing the Mujahideen. This explains the Wahabist orientation of the Taliban---and indeed Al-Qaeda---who were also part of the Mujahideen.

It is important to reiterate that Washington which was an enthusiastic supporter of the Mujahideen against Soviet occupation had no problem with Wahabism at that stage. In fact, Osama bin Laden and the CIA worked closely together in resisting the Soviets. By cultivating Osama, Al-Qaeda and the Mujahideen, the US, in a sense, strengthened the role of a conservative brand of Islam in national and international politics. That such a brand of Islam could triumph over a superpower must have been a tremendous boost to Osama and his ilk. It may well have inspired him to take on the other only remaining superpower. How ironical therefore that Osama the CIA ally should now come back to haunt the Empire. That is blowback at its finest !

Whatever Osama's dream may be about destroying the American Empire, it is very unlikely that he will succeed. He may not realize that his terrorism has strengthened the Empire. After 911, the Empire, in the name of fighting terrorism, has, as we have seen, penetrated Central Asia and the Caspian Sea, conquered Iraq and tightened its grip over the security apparatus of countries all over the world. Osama has proven that terrorism is counter productive; that it is a foolish strategy for fighting the Empire.

Resistance.

Are there other ways of resisting Empire ? Perhaps the strongest resistance at the moment is taking place in those countries which are under the direct occupation of the US and Israel. Leaving aside Afghanistan where there is organized but sporadic opposition to US and other foreign troops, there is no doubt at all that in Iraq resistance is widespread and systematic. Similarly, Palestinian resistance to Israeli rule is one of the most sustained and determined struggles for liberation in the contemporary world. Since controlling and dominating the Middle East is pivotal to the American and Israeli agenda, one can argue that Iraqi and Palestinian resistance have tremendous historical significance. To put it simply it is because of their resistance that the Empire is caught in a quagmire. Otherwise, the Empire builders, it is quite conceivable, would have expanded their hegemony to other parts of the Middle East by now.

We shall now turn to resistance to Empire from different regions of the world beginning with Europe. Though Europe remains integral to the Washington helmed Western alliance, governments in Germany and France are sometimes uneasy about American unilateralism and its eagerness to resort to force in the resolution of conflicts. This difference in approach was obvious in the Iraq crisis. Nonetheless, one should be realistic and should not expect European governments to stand up to Washington's imperial project.

In contrast, there is much more hope in Latin America. Cuba has the most consistent, principled record of a nation standing up to the Empire for more than 40 years and refusing to submit or surrender to its hegemony. In the last four years, the President of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, has also displayed some of the courage and conviction of his Cuban mentor, Fidel Castro. Chavez is equally determined to ensure that development benefits the poor and powerless in his society and that Venezuela does not become an appendage of the US. Other countries in Latin America such as Brazil. Chile, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay are also becoming a little more assertive vis-a-vis US power.

In Africa, government leaders in the Sudan, Libya and South Africa do take positions from time to time on regional and international economic and political issues which reveal that they are conscious of the importance of retaining their independence in the global arena. This would also be true of the leadership in Syria. The Russian leadership which has much more political muscle than many other governments in the world, partly because of its population and partly because of its recent history, is also not prepared to give in meekly to US hegemony. It appears to be keen to harness its military strength to advantage. The Indian government is also acutely aware of the fact that India is the world's second largest nation. Some of its leaders do not want her to become a mere client state of the US. In Southeast Asia, both Malaysia and Vietnam have shown that in spite of pursuing market oriented economic policies it is possible to preserve one's political independence.

Our quick survey of nations which continue to enjoy a degree of independence in the international arena leaves us with four states whose roles we have yet to explain. North Korea and Myanmar have isolated themselves from the global community and for that reason need not figure in our analysis. Iran is an outstanding example of a country which since its 1979 Revolution has thwarted numerous moves by the US and its allies and proxies to destroy its independence and sovereignty. In spite of an eight year war that was imposed on it, a failed invasion engineered by the US, a series of assassinations of its top political and religious leaders, economic sanctions by, and frozen assets in, the US, Iran has remained firm in its commitment to the Islamic ideals of its Revolution. Unlike Al-Qaeda---which is bitterly opposed to Iran and its Shia ideology – Iran has chosen to resist the US through the strengthening of its own sinews and through the forging of political and economic alliances at the regional and international level, guided by an approach to Islam that is less exclusive and more contemporary.

The other nation which offers a challenge to US hegemony is of course China. China, in a sense, is more indispensable to the global economy today than the US itself. It is an economic powerhouse which helps to create jobs and to keep businesses flourishing in a number of countries all over the world. Because of its economic power and its demographics---it is the world’s most populous nation---Washington has become very wary of China and is going all out to contain the emerging giant. But China has developed good relations with countries in every continent and is generally held in high esteem everywhere.

China's position in the international arena today and the role played by a number of other countries, apart from the resistance of the Palestinian and Iraqi people, mean that it will not be easy to build or to sustain the American Empire. If anything, the concerted opposition to the Empire from a segment of civil society has made it even more difficult for the elite in Washington and its allies to impose their imperial hegemony upon the rest of humankind. In global forums to parallel UN Summits on themes ranging from environment and human rights to development and racism held from 1992 to 2001, to massive street protests against predatory globalization in the late nineties and the early years of this century, these civil society actors had made it abundantly clear that they wanted a better world. The causes they espoused and the positions they articulated culminated in the inauguration of the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre Brazil in January 2001 ---- a forum which embodies the people’s aspirations for global justice and global peace, and is the antithesis of the neo-liberal capitalist, hegemonic world that Washington and its allies seek to build.

While some civil society actors were attempting to formulate alternatives to the dominant global system, others sought to address specific global concerns --- which also constitute a form of resistance to hegemonic interests. Civil society groups, together with some governments and a section of the media, played a major role in the successful campaign to ban landmines. Though the US government and other powerful states were against the Landmines Treaty of 1997, civil society demonstrated that it has the ability to advance the cause of international law, however formidable the obstacles. Civil society also helped to make the Kyoto Accord of 1997 on global warming a reality --- again in the face of strong opposition from the US and other states. The contribution of civil society in the creation of the International Criminal Court through the Rome Statute of 1998 would be a third example of how civil society resisted the hegemonic power of the US and in the process strengthened international law.

It is only when these trends within a segment of civil society expressed over a period of a decade or so are placed in their proper context that we will be able to appreciate the ability of civil society to mobilise millions and millions of people worldwide in the protest against the war in Iraq in March 2003. It is worth repeating over and over again that the Iraq protest was the most massive mobilization of people against war and for peace in history. It was the most significant expression of collective resistance against US hegemony that had ever taken place. It was the peoples of the world rejecting Empire !

Though the people failed to stop the war, they succeeded in de-legitimising the war. It was because of civil society mobilization that the war was rendered immoral and unjust. At the end of the day it showed that the Empire now has a formidable foe - in the people of the world.

Decline

However, resistance from outside alone will not be enough to bring down the Empire. It is one of the unerring laws of history that empires collapse partly because of internal weaknesses. The US’s military adventures---two wars in three years---are beginning to strain its resources. The Iraq war in particular has become an albatross around the nation's neck.

It is one of the reasons why the federal deficit has increased in recent years. Calculated together with the trade deficit, the US's total public debt stood at 7.9 trillion dollars as of 15 August 2005. The US is the world’s largest debtor nation. It is faced with other economic and social problems too, including unemployment, inadequate health care coverage, escalating fuel prices and a lack of investment in public infrastructures.

In the course of the last six months domestic opposition to the Iraq war has also been increasing. It is partly because the death toll among American troops in Iraq has been climbing steadily. At the time of writing, it has reached 2038. A majority of Americans now feel that the invasion of Iraq was a mistake. They would like the Bush Administration to set a deadline for the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. It is significant that armed forces recruitment exercises in the last one year or so have consistently recorded shortfalls. In other words, fewer and fewer Americans are prepared to go and fight in Iraq.

In the midst of all this, the anti-war movement in the US has received a shot in the arm through a brave mother who lost her son in Iraq. Cindy Sheehan whose soldier son Casey was killed in combat has asked President Bush to explain to her why her son had to die. What was the noble cause he was fighting for, she wants to know. Through sheer perseverance she has drawn around her thousands of other protestors who are equally determined to continue the campaign till the last soldier is brought home. In fact, Sheehan is now talking of launching a nation-wide civil disobedience movement against the war.

If domestic support for the war is in rapid decline, the US Administration's international standing had slumped a long time ago. Even before the war started, Bush's international credibility was at a low ebb. After two years it is obvious to even his most faithful supporters that Iraq is a total mess. It explains why in the eyes of the world Bush is at his nadir.

When a leadership commands so little credibility at home and abroad, how can it hope to continue to build a global empire ? This is why one can be absolutely certain that the first global empire in history is doomed to fail. And humankind will have every reason to celebrate.

The above essay is based upon a lecture delivered at Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia on 2 September 2005. The lecture was the university’s Annual Public Lecture (national level).

[Baca]

Neo-Cons, Fundies, Feddies, and Con-Artists

by Francis A. Boyle

It is now a matter of public record that immediately after the terrible
tragedy of 11 September 2001, U.S. Secretary of War Donald Rumsfeld and his
pro-Israeli "Neoconservative" Deputy Paul Wolfowitz began to plot, plan,
scheme and conspire to wage a war of aggression against Iraq by manipulating
the tragic events of September 11th in order to provide a pretext for doing
so.1 Of course Iraq had nothing at all to do with September 11th or
supporting Al-Qaeda . But that made no difference to Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz,
their Undersecretary of War Douglas Feith, Undersecretary of State John
Bolton, and the numerous other pro-Israeli Neo-Cons inhabiting the Bush Jr.
administration.

These pro-Israeli Neo-Cons had been schooled in the
Machiavellian/Nietzschean theories of Professor Leo Strauss who taught
political philosophy at the University of Chicago in its Department of
Political Science. The best exposé of Strauss's pernicious theories on law,
politics, government, for elitism, and against democracy can be found in two
scholarly books by the Canadian Professor of Political Philosophy Shadia B.
Drury.2 I entered the University of Chicago in September of 1968 shortly
after Strauss had retired. But I was trained in Chicago's Political Science
Department by Strauss's foremost protégé, co-author, and later literary
executor Joseph Cropsey. Based upon my personal experience as an alumnus of
Chicago's Political Science Department (A.B., 1971, in Political Science), I
concur completely with Professor Drury's devastating critique of Strauss. I
also agree with her penetrating analysis of the degradation of the American
political process that has been inflicted by Chicago's Straussian Neo-Con
cabal.3

The University of Chicago routinely trained me and innumerable other
students to become ruthless and unprincipled Machiavellians. That is
precisely why so many neophyte Neo-Con students gravitated towards the
University of Chicago or towards Chicago Alumni at other universities. Years
later, the University of Chicago became the "brains" behind the Bush Jr.
Empire and his Ashcroft Police State. Attorney General John Ashcroft
received his law degree from the University of Chicago in 1967. Many of his
lawyers at the Bush Jr. Department of Injustice are members of the
right-wing, racist, bigoted, reactionary, and totalitarian Federalist
Society (aka "Feddies"),4 which originated in part at the University of
Chicago. Feddies wrote the USA Patriot Act (USAPA) I and the draft for USAPA
II, which constitute the blueprint for establishing an American Police
State.5 Meanwhile, the Department of Injustice's own F.B.I. is still
covering up the U.S. governmental origins of the post 11 September 2001
anthrax attack on Washington D.C. that enabled Ashcroft and his Feddies to
stampede the U.S. Congress into passing USAPA I into law.6

Integrally related to and overlapping with the Feddies are members of the
University of Chicago "School" of Law-and-Kick-Them-in-the-Groin-Economics,
which in turn was founded upon the Market Fundamentalism of Milton Friedman,
now retired but long-time Professor of Economics at the University of
Chicago. Friedman and his "Chicago Boys" have raped, robbed, looted,
plundered, and pillaged economies and their respective peoples all over the
developing world.7 This Chicago gang of academic con-artists and charlatans
are proponents of the Nazi Doctrine of "useless eaters." Pursuant to
Friedman's philosophy of Market Fundamentalism, the "privatization" of Iraq
and its Oil Industry are already underway for the primary benefit of the
U.S. energy companies (e.g., Halliburton, formerly under Vice President Dick
Cheney) that had already interpenetrated the Bush Jr. administration as well
as the Bush Family itself. Enron.

Although miseducated8 at Yale and Harvard Business School, the "Ivies"
proved to be too liberal for Bush Jr. and his fundamentalist Christian
supporters, whose pointman and spearcarrier in the Bush Jr. administration
was Ashcroft, a Fundie himself. The Neo-Cons and the Fundies contracted an
"unholy alliance" in support of Bush Jr. For their own different reasons,
both gangs also worked hand-in-hand to support Israel's genocidal Prime
Minister Ariel Sharon, an internationally acknowledged war criminal.9

According to his own public estimate and boast before the American
Enterprise Institute, President Bush Jr. hired about 20 Straussians to
occupy key positions in his administration, intentionally taking offices
where they could push American foreign policy in favor of Israel and against
its chosen enemies such as Iraq, Iran, Syria, and the Palestinians.10 Most
of the Straussian Neo-Cons in the Bush Jr. administration and elsewhere are
Israel-firsters: What is "good" for Israel is by definition "good" for the
United States. Dual loyalties indeed.11

In addition, it was the Chicago Straussian cabal of pro-Israeli Neo-Cons who
set up a special "intelligence" unit within the Pentagon that was
responsible for manufacturing many of the bald-faced lies, deceptions,
half-truths, and sheer propaganda that the Bush Jr. administration then
disseminated to the lap-dog U.S. news media12 in order to generate public
support for a war of aggression against Iraq for the benefit of Israel and
in order to steal Iraq's oil.13 To paraphrase advice Machiavelli once
rendered to his Prince in Chapter XVIII of that book: Those who want to
deceive will always find those willing to be deceived.14 As I can attest
from my personal experience as an alumnus of the University of Chicago
Department of Political Science, the Bible of Chicago's Neo-Con Straussian
cabal is Machiavelli's The Prince. We students had to know our Machiavelli
by heart and rote at the University of Chicago.

As for the University of Chicago overall, its biblical Gospel is Allan
Bloom's The Closing of the American Mind (1987).15 Of course Bloom was
another protégé of Strauss, as well as a mentor to Wolfowitz. In his
Bloom-biographical novel Ravelstein (2000) Saul Bellow, formerly on the
University of Chicago Faculty, outed his self-styled friend Bloom as a
hedonist, pederast, and most promiscuous homosexual who died of AIDS. All
this was common knowledge at the University of Chicago, where Bloom is still
worshiped and his elitist screed against American higher-education still
revered on a pedestal.

In Ravelstein Wolfowitz appeared as Bloom's protégé Philip Gorman, leaking
national security secrets to his mentor during the Bush Sr. war against
Iraq. Strauss hovered around the novel as Bloom's mentor and guru Professor
Davarr. Strauss/Davarr is really the éminence grise of Ravelstein. With
friends like Bellow, Bloom did not need enemies. On the basis of Ravelstein
alone, Wolfowitz warrants investigation by the F.B.I.

Just recently the University of Chicago officially celebrated its Bush Jr.
Straussian Neo-Con cabal, highlighting Wolfowitz Ph.D. '72, Ahmad Chalabi,
Ph.D. '69 (the CIA's Iraqi puppet), Abram Shulsky, A.M. '68, Ph.D. '72 (head
of the Pentagon's special "intelligence" unit), Zalmay Khalilzad, Ph.D. '79
(Bush Jr's roving pro-consul for Afghanistan and then Iraq), as well as
faculty members Bellow, X '39, and Bloom, A.B. '49, A.M. '53, Ph.D. '55,
together with Strauss. According to the University of Chicago Magazine,
Bloom's rant "helped popularize Straussian ideals of democracy."16 It is
correct to assert that Bloom's book helped to popularize Straussian "ideas,"
but they were blatantly anti-democratic, Machiavellian, Nietzschean, and
elitist to begin with. Only the University of Chicago would have the
unmitigated Orwellian gall to publicly assert that Strauss and Bloom cared
one whit about democracy, let alone comprehended the "ideals of democracy."

Does anyone seriously believe that a pro-Israeli Chicago/Strauss/Bloom
product such as Wolfowitz could care less about democracy in Iraq? Or for
that matter anyone in the Bush Jr. administration? After they stole the 2000
presidential election from the American People in Florida and before the
Republican-controlled U.S. Supreme Court, some of whom were Feddies?17
Justice Clarence Thomas is a Straussian to boot.18

At the behest of its Straussian Neo-Con Political Science Department, in
1979 the entire University of Chicago went out of its way to grant the
"first Albert Pick Jr. Award for Outstanding Contributions to International
Understanding" to Robert "Mad Bomber" McNamara.19 In other words, the
University of Chicago itself maliciously strove to rehabilitate one of the
greatest international war criminals in the post-World War II era.20 Do not
send your children to the University of Chicago where they will grow up to
become warmongers like Wolfowitz or totalitarians like Ashcroft! The
University of Chicago is an intellectual and moral cesspool.

Endnotes

1. See, e.g., Rahul Mahajan, Full Spectrum Dominance 108 (2003).

2. Shadia B. Drury, The Political Ideas of Leo Strauss (1988); Leo
Strauss and the American Right (1999). See also Alain Frachon & Daniel
Vernet, The Strategist and the Philosopher: Leo Strauss and Albert
Wohlstetter, Le Monde, April 16, 2003, translated into English by Norman
Madarasz on Counterpunch.org., June 2, 2003.

3. See also David Brock, Blinded by the Right (2002).

4. George E. Curry & Trevor W. Coleman, Hijacking Justice, Emerge,
October 1999, at 42; Jerry M. Landay, The Conservative Cabal That's
Transforming American Law, Washington Monthly, March 2000, at 19; People for
the American Way, The Federalist Society (August 2001); Institute for
Democracy Studies, The Federalist Society and the Challenge to a Democratic
Jurisprudence (January 2001).

5. Francis A. Boyle, Bush's Banana Republic, Counterpunch.org, Oct. 11,
2002.

6. Francis A. Boyle, Biowarfare, Terror Weapons and the U.S.: Home Brew?,
Counterpunch.org, April 25, 2002.

7. See Greg Palast, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy (2003), at 5 et seq.

8. See Chomsky on Miseducation (Donald Macedo ed. 2000).

9. Francis A. Boyle, Take Sharon to The Hague, Counterpunch.org, June 6,
2002.

10. White House Press Release, President Discusses the Future of Iraq,
Washington Hilton Hotel, Feb. 26, 2003.

11. Nasser H. Aruri, Dishonest Broker, 193-216 (2003). See also Tanya
Reinhart, Israel/Palestine (2002); Cheryl A. Rubenberg, The Palestinians
(2003).

12. Norman Solomon, The Habits of Highly Deceptive Media (1999); Noam
Chomsky, Media Control (1997).

13. Seymour M. Hersh, Selective Intelligence, New Yorker, May 8, 2003;
Michael Lind, The Weird Men Behind George W. Bus's War, New Statesman -
London, April 7, 2003; Julian Borger, The Spies Who Pushed for War, The
Guardian, July 17, 2003.

14. Machiavelli, The Prince 147 (M. Musa trans. & ed. 1964): ". . . and
men are so simple-minded and so dominated by their present needs that one
who deceives will always find one who will allow himself to be deceived."
This Bilingual Edition of The Prince by Mark Musa was the one preferred by
Joseph Cropsey to teach us students.

15. But see Lawrence W. Levine, The Opening of the American Mind (1996).

16. Between the Lines, University of Chicago Magazine, June 2003, at 54

17. Vincent Bugliosi, The Betrayal of America (2001); Greg Palast, The
Best Democracy Money Can Buy 11-81 (2003).

18. Gerhard Sporl, The Leo-Conservatives, Der Spiegel, Aug. 4, 2003.

19. McNamara Receives Pick Award Amid Protests, University of Chicago
Magazine, Summer 1979, at 4.

20. Noam Chomsky, Rethinking Camelot (1993); Robert S. McNamara, In
Retrospect (1995).

[Baca]

ARAB STRATEGY FORUM:

Political Systems in the Arab World in 2020: Moving Towards Reform and Development

by Professor Francis A. Boyle
IN THE NAME OF GOD, THE COMPASSIONATE, THE MERCIFUL

Your Royal Highnesses, Distinguished Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen.

The demand by the Bush Jr. administration and its Zionist neo-conservative
operatives for democratization in the Arab world is a joke and a fraud that
is designed to pressure, undermine, and destabilize Arab governments and
states at the behest of the genocidal Israeli apartheid regime, and to
pursue America's continuing campaign for outright military control and
domination of the Gulf oil and gas resources that the United States
government launched in direct reaction to the Arab oil embargo of the West
in 1973. For over the past three decades American foreign policy toward the
entire Middle East has been determined by oil and Israel, in that order.

The United States government will seek direct military control and
domination of the hydrocarbon resources of the Arab and Muslim world until
there is no oil and gas left for them to steal, using Israel as its regional
"policeman" towards that end. Oil and Israel were behind both the Bush Sr.
and Bush Jr. wars against Iraq. And now Bush Jr. is threatening to attack
Syria, Lebanon, and Iran in conjunction with the genocidal apartheid regime
in Israel. As the oil and gas in the Arab and Muslim world proceed to run
out, the United States and Israel will become even more predatory,
aggressive, destructive, and genocidal toward Arab and Muslim states and
peoples.

The Bush Jr. administration and its Zionist neo-conservative operatives
could not care less about democracy in the Arab world. In fact, Bush Jr. and
his Neo-Cons are all trying very hard to build a Police State in the United
States of America that we lawyers are vigorously opposing. What the Bush Jr.
administration and its Zionist neo-conservative operatives really want in
the Arab world are quisling dictators who will do their dirty work for them
and the genocidal Israeli apartheid regime against the wishes and prayers of
the Arab people for democracy, human rights, the rule of law,
constitutionalism, as well as for the liberation of Palestine and Al Quds.

Those will be the predominant facts and trends that the Arab world will have
to confront between now and 2020. It was not my assignment here today to
advise Arab states and the Arab people how to counteract this anti-Arab and
anti-Muslim agenda by the United States and Israel. But certainly the sacred
Koran and the divinely inspired teachings of the Prophet Mohammed - May
Peace and Blessings Be Upon Him! - shall guide you and protect you during
this most difficult period in the history of the Arab Nation, the Arab
People, Arab States, and Islam.

Shukhran.

END.
(c) Copyright 2004 by Francis A. Boyle. All rights reserved.
[Baca]

A War Crime in Real Time

Obliterating Fallujah

By FRANCIS A. BOYLE

The obliteration of Fallujah continues apace. Article 6(b) of the 1945 Nuremberg Charter defines a Nuremberg War Crime in relevant part as the ". . . wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages. . ." According to this definitive definition, the Bush Jr. administration's destruction of Fallujah constitutes a war crime for which Nazis were tried and executed. There is nothing surprising about that.

Since the Bush Jr. administration's installation in power by the United States Supreme Court in January of 2001, the peoples of the world have witnessed a government in the United States of America that has demonstrated little if any respect for fundamental considerations of international law, international organizations, and human rights, let alone appreciation of the requirements for maintaining international peace and security. What the world has watched instead is a comprehensive and malicious assault upon the integrity of the international legal order by a group of men and women who are thoroughly Machiavellian in their perception of international relations and in their conduct of both foreign policy and domestic affairs. This is not simply a question of giving or withholding the benefit of the doubt when it comes to complicated matters of foreign affairs and defense policies to a U.S. government charged with the security of both its own citizens and those of its allies in Europe, the Western Hemisphere, and the Pacific. Rather, the Bush Jr. administration's foreign policy constitutes ongoing criminal activity under well-recognized principles of both international law and U.S. domestic law, in particular the Nuremberg Charter, the Nuremberg Judgment, and the Nuremberg Principles. So their obliteration of Fallujah was to be expected.

One generation ago the peoples of the world asked themselves: Where were the "good" Germans? Well, there were some good Germans. The Lutheran theologian and pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer was the foremost exemplar of someone who led a life of principled opposition to the Nazi-terror state even unto death.

Today the peoples of the world are likewise asking themselves: Where are the "good" Americans? Well, there are some good Americans. Like three Catholic Nuns in Denver, they are getting arrested and going to jail for protesting against United States weapons of mass destruction (WMD) whose power for human extermination far exceeds even the wildest fantasies of Hitler and the Nazis. Or else for protesting against illegal U.S.. military interventions around the world. Just recently the Nuclear Resister estimated that since the Fall of 2002, there have been more than 9,500 anti-war related arrests in the United States alone. Many more will be coming.

In international legal terms, the Bush Jr. administration itself should now be viewed as constituting an ongoing criminal conspiracy under international criminal law in violation of the Nuremberg Charter, the Nuremberg Judgment, and the Nuremberg Principles, due to its formulation and undertaking of aggressive war policies that are legally akin to those perpetrated by the Nazi regime. As a consequence, American citizens possess the basic right under international law and the United States domestic law, including the U.S. Constitution, to engage in acts of non-violent civil resistance in order to prevent, impede, thwart, or terminate ongoing criminal activities perpetrated by U.S. government officials in their conduct of foreign affairs policies and military operations purported to relate to defense and counter-terrorism.
This same right of civil resistance extends pari passu to all citizens of the world community of states. Everyone around the world has both the right and the duty under international law to resist ongoing criminal activities perpetrated by the Bush Jr. administration and its nefarious foreign accomplices such as Blair, Berlusconi, Howard, Koizumi, Kwasniewski, etc. by all non-violent means possible. If it is not so restrained, the Bush Jr. administration could very well precipitate a Third World War.

The time for preventive action is now. Civil resistance is the way to go. People power can overcome power politics. Popular movements have succeeded in toppling tyrannical, dictatorial and authoritarian regimes throughout former Communist countries in Eastern Europe, as well as in Asia, and most recently in Latin America. It is time once again to exercise People Power here in the United States of America: "When in the Course of human Events. . . We hold these Truths to be self-evident. . . . we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and sacred Honor."

Despite the best efforts by the Bush Jr. Leaguers to the contrary, we American Citizens still have our First Amendment Rights: Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Association, Freedom of Assembly, Freedom to Petition our Government for the Redress of these massive Grievances, Civil Resistance, etc. We are going to have to start vigorously exercising all of our First Amendment Rights right now. We must use them or else, as the saying goes, we will lose them. We must act not only for the good of the Peoples of Southwest Asia, but for our future, that of our children, that of our nation as a democratic society committed to the Rule of Law and the U.S. Constitution. The Nazis had their "homeland" too.

Francis A. Boyle, Professor of Law, University of Illinois, is author of
Foundations of World Order, Duke University Press,
The Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence, and Palestine, Palestinians and International Law, by Clarity Press.

He can be reached at: FBOYLE@LAW.UIUC.EDU

[Baca]

THE KUALA LUMPUR INITIATIVE TO CRIMINALISE WAR

The Kuala Lumpur Global Peace Forum of concerned peoples from all five continents are: UNITED in the belief that peace is the essential condition for the survival and well-being of the human race, DETERMINED to promote peace and save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, OUTRAGED over the frequent resort to war in the settlement of disputes between nations, DISTURBED that militarists are preparing for more wars, TROUBLED that use of armed force increases insecurity for all, and TERRIFIED that the possession of nuclear weapons and the imminent risk of nuclear war will lead to the annihilation of life on earth. To achieve peace, we now declare that: Wars increasingly involve the killing of innocent people and are, therefore, abhorrent and criminal. Killings in war are as criminal as the killings within societies in times of peace. Since killings in peace time are subject to the domestic law of crime, killings in war must likewise be subject to the international law of crimes. This should be so irrespective of whether these killings in war are authorized or permitted by domestic law. All commercial, financial, industrial and scientific activities that aid and abet war should be criminalised. All national leaders who initiate aggression must be subjected to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. All nations must strengthen the resolve to accept the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter and institute methods to settle international disputes by peaceful means and to renounce war. Armed force shall not be used except when authorised by a Resolution passed by two-thirds majority of the total membership of the General Assembly of the United Nations. All legislators and all members of Government must affirm their belief in peace and pledge to strive for peace. Political parties all over the world must include peace as one of their principal objectives. Non-Governmental Organisations committed to the promotion of peace should be set up in all nations. Public servants and professionals, particularly in the medical, legal, educational and scientific fields, must promote peace and campaign actively against war. The media must actively oppose war and the incitement to war and consciously promote the peaceful settlement of international disputes. Entertainment media must cease to glorify war and violence and should instead cultivate the ethos of peace. All religious leaders must condemn war and promote peace. To these ends the Forum resolves to establish a permanent Secretariat in Kuala Lumpur to: IMPLEMENT this Initiative, OPPOSE policies and programmes that incite war, and SEEK the cooperation of NGOs worldwide to achieve the goals of this Initiative. Signed by: Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf Prof Francis A. Boyle Dr. Helen Caldicott Mr Matthias Chang Prof Michel Chossudovsky Prof Shad Saleem Faruqi Mr Denis J. Halliday Dato' Mukhriz Mahathir Dr Chandra Muzaffar Dato' Michael O.K. Yeoh Mr Hans-Christof Von Sponeck

[Baca]

A warning for investors in the cozy U.S. Treasury bond market

[Baca]

Dollar shift: While Americans spent, Chinese saved

— Niall Ferguson

In March 2005, a low-key Princeton economist who had become a Federal Reserve governor coined a novel theory to explain the growing tendency of Americans to borrow from foreigners, particularly the Chinese, to finance their heavy spending.

The problem, he said, was not that Americans spend too much, but that foreigners save too much. The Chinese have piled up so much excess savings that they lend money to the United States at low rates, underwriting American consumption.

This colossal credit cycle could not last forever, he said. But in a global economy, the transfer of Chinese money to America was a market phenomenon that would take years, even a decade, to work itself out. For now, he said, "we probably have little choice except to be patient."

In the past decade, China has invested upward of $1 trillion, mostly earnings from manufacturing exports, into American government bonds and government-backed mortgage debt. That has lowered interest rates and helped fuel a historic consumption binge and housing bubble in the United States.

China, some economists say, lulled American consumers, and their leaders, into complacency about their spendthrift ways.

"This was a blinking red light," said Kenneth Rogoff, a professor of economics at Harvard and a former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund. "We should have reacted to it."

In hindsight, many economists say, the United States should have recognized that borrowing from abroad for consumption and deficit spending at home was not a formula for economic success. Even as that weakness is becoming more widely recognized, however, the United States is likely to be more addicted than ever to foreign creditors to finance record government spending to revive the broken economy.

To be sure, there were few ready remedies. Some critics argue that the United States could have pushed Beijing harder to abandon its policy of keeping the value of its currency weak — a policy that made its exports less expensive and helped turn it into the world's leading manufacturing power. If China had allowed its currency to float according to market demand in the past decade, its export growth probably would have moderated. And it would not have acquired the same vast hoard of dollars to invest abroad.

Others say the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department should have seen the Chinese lending for what it was: a giant stimulus to the American economy, not unlike interest rate cuts by the Fed. These critics say the Fed under Alan Greenspan contributed to the creation of the housing bubble by leaving interest rates too low for too long, even as Chinese investment further stoked an easy-money economy. The Fed should have cut interest rates less in the middle of this decade, they say, and started raising them sooner, to help reduce speculation in real estate.

Today, with the wreckage around him, Bernanke said he regretted that more was not done to regulate financial institutions and mortgage providers, which might have prevented the flood of investment, including that from China, from being so badly used. But the Fed's role in regulation is limited to banks. And stricter regulation by itself would not have been enough, he insisted.

"Achieving a better balance of international capital flows early on could have significantly reduced the risks to the financial system," Bernanke said in an interview in his office overlooking the Washington Mall.

"However," he continued, "this could only have been done through international cooperation, not by the United States alone. The problem was recognized, but sufficient international cooperation was not forthcoming."

The inaction was due to a range of factors, political and economic. By the yardsticks that appeared to matter most — prosperity and growth — the relationship between China and the United States also seemed to be paying off for both countries. Neither had a strong incentive to break an addiction: China to strong export growth and financial stability; the United States to cheap imports and low-cost foreign loans.

In Washington, China was treated as a threat by some people, but mostly because it lured away manufacturing jobs. Others argued that China's heavy lending to this country was risky because Chinese leaders could decide to withdraw money at a moment's notice, creating a panicky run on the dollar.

Bernanke viewed such international investment flows through a different lens. He argued that Chinese invested savings abroad because consumers there did not have enough confidence to spend. Changing that situation would take years, and did not amount to a pressing problem for the Americans.

"The global savings glut story did us a collective disservice," said Edwin Truman, a former Fed and Treasury official. "It created the idea that the world was doing it to us and we couldn't do anything about it."

But Bernanke's theory fit the prevailing hands-off, pro-market ideology of recent years. Greenspan and the Bush administration treated the record American trade deficit and heavy foreign borrowing as an abstract threat, not an urgent problem.

Bernanke, after he took charge of the Fed, warned that the imbalances between the countries were growing more serious. By then, however, it was too late to do much about them. And the White House still regarded imbalances as an arcane subject best left to economists.

By itself, money from China is not a bad thing. As American officials like to note, it speaks to the attractiveness of the United States as a destination for foreign investment. In the 19th century, the United States built its railroads with capital borrowed from the British.

In the past decade, China arguably enabled an American boom. Low-cost Chinese goods helped keep a lid on inflation, while the flood of Chinese investment helped the government finance mortgages and a public debt of close to $11 trillion.

But Americans did not use the lower-cost money afforded by Chinese investment to build a 21st-century equivalent of the railroads. Instead, the government engaged in a costly war in Iraq, and consumers used loose credit to buy sport utility vehicles and larger homes. Banks and investors, eagerly seeking higher interest rates in this easy-money environment, created risky new securities like collateralized debt obligations.

"Nobody wanted to get off this drug," said Senator Lindsey Graham, the South Carolina Republican who pushed legislation to punish China by imposing stiff tariffs. "Their drug was an endless line of customers for made-in-China products. Our drug was the Chinese products and cash."

A new economic dance

The United States has been here before. In the 1980s, it ran heavy trade deficits with Japan, which recycled some of its trading profits into American government bonds.

At that time, the deficits were viewed as a grave threat to America's economic might. Action took the form of a 1985 agreement known as the Plaza Accord. The world's major economies intervened in currency markets to drive down the value of the dollar and drive up the Japanese yen.

The arrangement did slow the growth of the trade deficit for a time. But economists blamed the sharp revaluation of the Japanese yen for halting Japan's rapid growth. The lesson of the Plaza Accord was not lost on China, which at that time was just emerging as an export power.

China tied itself even more tightly to the United States than did Japan. In 1995, it devalued its currency and set a firm exchange rate of roughly 8.3 to the dollar, a level that remained fixed for a decade.

During the Asian financial crisis of 1997-98, China clung firmly to its currency policy, earning praise from the Clinton administration for helping check the spiral of devaluation sweeping Asia. Its low wages attracted hundreds of billions of dollars in foreign investment.

By the early part of this decade, the United States was importing huge amounts of Chinese-made goods — toys, shoes, flat-screen televisions and auto parts — while selling much less to China in return.

"For consumers, this was a net benefit because of the availability of cheaper goods," said Lawrence Meyer, a former Fed governor. "There's no question that China put downward pressure on inflation rates."

But in classical economics, that trade gap could not have persisted for long without bankrupting the American economy. Except that China recycled its trade profits right back into the United States.

It did so to protect its own interests. China kept its banks under tight state control and its currency on a short leash to ensure financial stability. It required companies and individuals to save in the state-run banking system most foreign currency — primarily dollars — that they earned from foreign trade and investment.

As foreign trade surged, this hoard of dollars became enormous. In 2000, the reserves were less than $200 billion; today they are about $2 trillion.

Chinese leaders chose to park the bulk of that in safe securities backed by the American government, including Treasury bonds and the debt of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which had implicit government backing.

This not only allowed the United States to continue to finance its trade deficit, but, by creating greater demand for United States securities, it also helped push interest rates below where they would otherwise be. For years, China's government was eager to buy American debt at yields many in the private sector felt were too low.

This financial and trade embrace between the United States and China grew so tight that Ferguson, the financial historian, has dubbed the two countries Chimerica.

'Tiptoeing' around a partner

Being attached at the hip was not entirely comfortable for either side, though for widely differing reasons.

In the United States, more people worried about cheap Chinese goods than cheap Chinese loans. By 2003, China's trade surplus with the United States was ballooning, and lawmakers in Congress were restive. Senator Graham and Senator Charles Schumer, Democrat of New York, introduced a bill threatening to impose a 27 percent duty on Chinese goods.

"We had a moment where we caught everyone's attention: the White House and China," Graham recalled.

At the People's Bank of China, the central bank, a consensus was also emerging in late 2004: China should break its tight link to the dollar, which would make Chinese exports more expensive.

Yu Yongding, a leading economic adviser, pressed the case. The American trade and budget deficits were not sustainable, he warned. China was wrong to keep its currency artificially depressed and depend too much on selling cheap goods.

Proponents of revaluation in China argued that the country's currency policies denied the fruits of prosperity to Chinese consumers. Beijing was investing their savings in low-yielding American government securities. And with a weak currency, they said, Chinese could not afford many imported goods.

The central bank's English-speaking governor, Zhou Xiaochuan, was among those who favored a sizable revaluation.

But when Beijing finally acted to amend its currency policy in 2005, under heavy pressure from Congress and the White House, it moved cautiously. The renminbi was allowed to climb only 2 percent. The Communist Party opted for only incremental adjustments to its economic model after a decade of fast growth.

Little changed: China's exports kept soaring and investment poured into steel mills and garment factories.

But American officials eased the pressure. They decided to put more emphasis on encouraging Chinese consumers to spend more of their savings, which they hoped would eventually bring the two economies into better balance. On a tour of China, John Snow, the Treasury secretary at the time, even urged the Chinese to start using credit cards.

China kicked off its own campaign to encourage domestic consumption, which it hoped would provide a new source. But Chinese save with the same zeal that, until recently, Americans spent.

Shorn of the social safety net of the old Communist state, they squirrel away money to pay for hospital visits, housing or retirement. This accounts for the savings glut identified by Bernanke.

Privately, Chinese officials confided to visiting Americans that the effort was not achieving much.

"It is sometimes hard to change successful models," said Robert Zoellick, who negotiated with the Chinese as a deputy secretary of state. "It is prototypically American to say, 'This worked well but now you've got to change it.' "

In Washington, some critics say too little was done. A former Treasury official, Timothy Adams, tried to get the IMF to act as a watchdog for currency manipulation by China, which would have subjected Beijing to more global pressure.

Yet when Snow was succeeded as Treasury secretary by Henry M. Paulson Jr. in 2006, the IMF was sidelined, according to several officials, and Paulson took command of China policy.

He was not shy about his credentials. As an investment banker with Goldman Sachs, Paulson made 70 trips to China. In his office hangs a watercolor depicting the hometown of Zhu Rongji, a forceful former prime minister.

"I pushed very hard on currency because I believed it was important for China to get to a market-determined currency," Paulson said in an interview. But he conceded he did not get what he wanted.

In late 2006, Paulson invited Bernanke to accompany him to Beijing. Bernanke used the occasion to deliver a blunt speech to the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, in which he advised the Chinese to reorient their economy and revalue their currency.

At the last minute, however, Bernanke deleted a reference to the exchange rate being an "effective subsidy" for Chinese exports, out of fear that it could be used as a pretext for a trade lawsuit against China.

Critics detected a pattern. They noted that in its twice-yearly reports to Congress about trading partners, the Treasury Department had never branded China a currency manipulator.

"We're tiptoeing around, desperately trying not to irritate or offend the Chinese," said Thea Lee, public policy director of the AFL-CIO "But to get concrete results, you have to be confrontational."

An embrace that won't let go

For China, too, this crisis has been a time of reckoning. Americans are buying fewer Chinese DVD players and microwave ovens. Trade is collapsing, and thousands of workers are losing their jobs. Chinese leaders are terrified of social unrest.

Having allowed the renminbi to rise a little after 2005, the Chinese government is now under intense pressure domestically to reverse course and depreciate it. China's fortunes remain tethered to those of the United States. And the reverse is equally true.

In a glassed-in room in a nondescript office building in Washington, the Treasury conducts nearly daily auctions of billions of dollars' worth of government bonds. An old army helmet sits on a shelf: as a lark, Treasury officials have been known to strap it on while they monitor incoming bids.

For the past five years, China has been one of the most prolific bidders. It holds $652 billion in Treasury debt, up from $459 billion a year ago. Add in its Fannie Mae bonds and other holdings, and analysts figure China owns $1 of every $10 of America's public debt.

The Treasury is conducting more auctions than ever to finance its $700 billion bailout of the banks. Still more will be needed to pay for the incoming Obama administration's stimulus package. The United States, economists say, will depend on the Chinese to keep buying that debt, perpetuating the American habit.

Even so, Paulson said he viewed the debate over global imbalances as hopelessly academic. He expressed doubt that Bernanke or anyone else could have solved the problem as it was germinating.

"One lesson that I have clearly learned," said Paulson, sitting beneath his Chinese watercolor. "You don't get dramatic change, or reform, or action unless there is a crisis."

David Barboza contributed reporting from Shanghai, and Keith Bradsher from Hong Kong.

[Baca]

Thomas L. Friedman: Time to reboot America

By Thomas L. Friedman
Published: December 25, 2008

I had a bad day last Friday, but it was an all-too-typical day for America.

It actually started well, on Kau Sai Chau, an island off Hong Kong, where I stood on a rocky hilltop overlooking the South China Sea and talked to my wife back in Maryland, static-free, using a friend's Chinese cellphone. A few hours later, I took off from Hong Kong's ultramodern airport after riding out there from downtown on a sleek high-speed train - with wireless connectivity that was so good I was able to surf the Web the whole way on my laptop.

Landing at Kennedy Airport from Hong Kong was, as I've argued before, like going from the Jetsons to the Flintstones. The ugly, low-ceilinged arrival hall was cramped, and using a luggage cart cost $3. (Couldn't we Americans at least supply foreign visitors with a free luggage cart, like other major airports in the world?) As I looked around at this dingy room, it reminded of somewhere I had been before. Then I remembered: It was the luggage hall in the old Hong Kong Kai Tak Airport. It closed in 1998.

The next day I went to Penn Station, where the escalators down to the tracks are so narrow that they seem to have been designed before suitcases were invented. The disgusting track-side platforms apparently have not been cleaned since World War II. I took the Acela, America's sorry excuse for a bullet train, from New York to Washington. Along the way, I tried to use my cellphone to conduct an interview and my conversation was interrupted by three dropped calls within one 15-minute span.

All I could think to myself was: If we're so smart, why are other people living so much better than us? What has become of our infrastructure, which is so crucial to productivity? Back home, I was greeted by the news that General Motors was being bailed out - that's the GM that Fortune magazine just noted "lost more than $72 billion in the past four years, and yet you can count on one hand the number of executives who have been reassigned or lost their job."

We can't continue in this mode of "Dumb as we wanna be." We've indulged ourselves for too long with tax cuts that we can't afford, bailouts of auto companies that have become giant wealth-destruction machines, energy prices that do not encourage investment in 21st-century renewable power systems or efficient cars, public schools with no national standards to prevent illiterates from graduating and immigration policies that have our colleges educating the world's best scientists and engineers and then, when these foreigners graduate, instead of stapling green cards to their diplomas, we order them to go home and start companies to compete against ours.

To top it off, we've fallen into a trend of diverting and rewarding the best of our collective IQ to people doing financial engineering rather than real engineering. These rocket scientists and engineers were designing complex financial instruments to make money out of money - rather than designing cars, phones, computers, teaching tools, Internet programs and medical equipment that could improve the lives and productivity of millions.

For all these reasons, the present crisis is not just a financial meltdown crying out for a cash injection. We are in much deeper trouble. In fact, we as a country have become General Motors - as a result of our national drift. Look in the mirror: GM is us.

That's why we don't just need a bailout. We need a reboot. We need a build out. We need a buildup. We need a national makeover. That is why the next few months are among the most important in U.S. history. Because of the financial crisis, Barack Obama has the bipartisan support to spend $1 trillion in stimulus. But we must make certain that every bailout dollar, which we're borrowing from our kids' future, is spent wisely.

It has to go into training teachers, educating scientists and engineers, paying for research and building the most productivity-enhancing infrastructure - without building white elephants. Generally, I'd like to see fewer government dollars shoveled out and more creative tax incentives to stimulate the private sector to catalyze new industries and new markets. If we allow this money to be spent on pork, it will be the end of us.

America still has the right stuff to thrive. We still have the most creative, diverse, innovative culture and open society - in a world where the ability to imagine and generate new ideas with speed and to implement them through global collaboration is the most important competitive advantage. China may have great airports, but last week it went back to censoring The New York Times and other Western news sites. Censorship restricts your people's imaginations. That's really, really dumb. And that's why for all our missteps, the 21st century is still up for grabs.

John Kennedy led us on a journey to discover the Moon. Obama needs to lead us on a journey to rediscover, rebuild and reinvent our own backyard.
[Baca]

Recession will 'set British economy back five years'

Households must not rule out the prospect that the UK's economy shrinks by between 5 per cent and 10 per cent next year if the financial crisis sets off an even more vicious cycle of cutbacks, according to the Centre for Economics and Business Research.

The warning comes only days after the Office for National Statistics announced that gross domestic product contracted by 0.6 per cent in the third quarter - worse than it previously estimated and the weakest quarterly figure since the early 1990s recession. Although Alistair Darling indicated in the pre-Budget report that the slump would be less severe than in the early 1990s, a growing majority of economists are now warning that the scale of the downturn could be almost unprecedented.

Capital Economics and Bank of America have predicted that the economy will shrink next year by the biggest amount since 1947 - one of the worst recessions Britain has ever experienced, following Second World War demobilisation and one of the coldest winters on record. However, Ben Read of the CEBR warned that the scale of the recession could be even more severe.

"It is easy to see that things could be even worse," he said. "Despite the public declarations by the Government that the banks ought to be lending more, it is clear that the primary concern of many of our largest banks is to shore up their balance sheets and, for those on the end of government bail-outs, to pay back their Treasury paymasters.

"With few incentives for banks to behave otherwise, credit availability to businesses may become even worse during 2009. At the same time, businesses are already starting to become entrenched in a deflationary mindset where investment budgets are curtailed not only because budgets are tight, but also because prices are falling."

With companies facing major pressure on their balance sheets, they look likely to slash their investment budgets, in so doing cutting staff numbrs and wage bills next year. If this combines with a sudden sharp increase in the rate at which consumers save rather than spend, the result could be that a major chunk of UK economic output is lost, he said.

"If this deleveraging scenario occurs, a contraction of between five and ten per cent could be on the cards, setting the United Kingdom economy back by five years," he said. Although such an outcome is less likely if the Bank of England slashes rates even further in the coming months. The Bank is expected to reduce borrowing costs beneath 2 per cent next month for the first time in its 314-year history, and many suspect it could reduce them to zero before the summer.

Economists also fear that house prices, which have fallen by around 15 per cent already this year, could drop a further 15 per cent or 20 per cent next year as the number of redundancies climbs further.

[Baca]

Remaja dan kemandirian teknologi

DENGAN penggunaan teknologi, manusia mampu merentasi sempadan upaya deria serta kudrat diri. Dalam kata lain, teknologi membantu manusia melaksanakan sesuatu kerja dengan lebih cekap, pantas dan berkesan.

Kebergantungan manusia terhadap teknologi dalam kehidupan seharian dilihat semakin bertambah sejajar dengan pengenalan teknologi terbaru. Baik komputer, telefon bimbit, mahupun kereta atau sebagainya merupakan antara teknologi yang tidak dapat dipisahkan dengan suasana hidup zaman moden hari ini.

Teknologi selamanya alat

Bersama teknologi juga datangnya maklumat melalui saluran media massa. Terdapat pelbagai maklumat yang kedapatan dari mana-mana sumber, yang kadang kala begitu sarat untuk ditapis, ditelan dan akhirnya dicerna.

Ada maklumat yang sahih, belum sahih dan tidak sahih. Ada yang relevan dan ada yang tidak. Semuanya memerlukan kebijaksanaan kita dalam mengurus penerimaan maklumat, menilainya secara kritis dan kemudian mengolahnya menurut pedoman akal dan wahyu Ilahi.

Obsesi terhadap teknologi kadang kala membuatkan manusia menganggap teknologi sebagai matlamat, lalu menjuruskan mereka ke arah kehidupan yang materialistik. Pembangunan teknologi menjadi agenda teras sedangkan pembangunan insani sering terpinggir.

Pemilikan teknologi dirasakan dapat membawakan perasaan lebih hebat, lebih tinggi berbanding orang lain, dan kemudiannya mencetuskan rasa ego serta rasa ingin menguasai insan lain, atau mungkin negara lain.

Namun, adakah benar penemuan dan pemilikan teknologi sebagai sesuatu yang ingin dibanggakan atau disalah gunakan untuk menindas yang lain, seperti mana yang dilakukan oleh negara yang menganggap dirinya Polis Dunia?

Justeru, teknologi perlu ditatang sebagai alat untuk mencapai sesuatu yang murni, sambil memelihara kemurnian yang sedia ada. Aspek budaya, bahasa, serta agama tidak seharusnya terhanyut akibat gelombang tsunami teknologi yang begitu deras.

Sebaliknya, aspek-aspek tersebut perlu menjadi penampan arus agar gelombang kemodenan yang melanda tidak menghanyutkan elemen tradisi yang tetap kekal relevan dalam kehidupan seharian.

Teknologi seharusnya membantu manusia mencapai sesuatu manfaat untuk dirinya, insan lain serta makhluk lain di dunia ini. Penggunaan teknologi yang mengabaikan hak orang lain atau makhluk lain tidak akan membolehkan manusia mencapai manfaat sebenar daripada teknologi tersebut.

Penggunaan teknologi untuk penerokaan hutan secara tidak terkawal umpamanya, bukan sahaja akan memusnahkan habitat semula jadi haiwan liar, tetapi juga sebenarnya merosakkan kawasan tadahan air, mengganggu struktur tanah dan sebagainya. Natijahnya, dapat kita lihat kini seperti kejadian tanah runtuh dan banjir.

Dari satu segi, teknologi tetap penting untuk dikuasai kerana bersama teknologi, kita mampu mencapai kemandirian ekonomi, politik, pertahanan, sumber asli dan sebagainya. Dengan adanya teknologi, pembangunan negara akan dapat bergerak seiring kepesatan keperluan penduduk yang semakin meningkat dari semasa ke semasa.

Fikir teknologi fikir umat

Kecanggihan teknologi terkini bukan hanya perlu dimanfaatkan dalam konteks penggunaan produk siap sematamata. Pada masa yang sama rasa ingin tahu boleh dijana berkenaan bagaimana teknologi tersebut berfungsi serta asas ilmu sains yang digunakan.

Di samping itu, kita juga perlu berfikir tentang dari mana asal teknologi tersebut, adakah ia dibangunkan oleh umat Islam itu sendiri atau dari Barat. Tambahan lagi, adakah terdapat manamana peranan umat Islam dalam pembangunan teknologi tersebut, umpamanya penyelidikan atau pembuatan, atau mungkin tiada langsung?

Secara objektifnya, kita perlu mengakui bahawa kebanyakan teknologi yang diguna pakai hari ini datangnya dari Barat, bermula daripada proses penyelidikan, disusuli dengan pembuatan, dan kemudiannya pemasaran serta pengedaran. Dan kita sebagai umat Islam mungkin hanya banyak berperanan sebagai pengguna akhir kepada teknologi tersebut.

Melihat kepada perkara ini, kita perlu menginsafi bahawa secara keseluruhannya umat Islam masih lagi jauh ketinggalan dalam bidang sains dan teknologi berbanding umat lain. Kita masih lagi tidak mampu untuk membangunkan teknologi sendiri bertitik tolak daripada keadaan akar budaya ilmu kita sendiri yang masih belum subur bertunas.

Sedangkan saintis-saintis Islam terdahulu banyak menghasilkan penemuan cemerlang dan terawal dan seterusnya menjadi asas kepada perkembangan bidang sains dan teknologi dewasa kini.

Ibn Haitham umpamanya digelar sebagai 'Bapa Optik Moden' atas sumbangan beliau dalam menghasilkan penyelidikan dan penemuan cemerlang terawal dalam bidang optik. Kini ilmu yang ditemui beliau menjadi asas kepada ilmu optik masa kini serta aplikasi teknologi yang dibangunkan.

Malahan, umat Islam itu sendiri seharusnya merupakan umat yang terbaik, seperti mana maksud firman Allah dalam surah Ali-Imran ayat 110. Kemajuan kita, baik dalam pembangunan fizikal mahupun akhlak seharusnya menjadi tanda aras kepada umat-umat lain agar mereka mencontohi kita.

Justeru, remaja Islam hari ini perlu sedar bahawa harapan untuk memajukan umat Islam tergalas pada bahu mereka. Remaja Islam, yang masih mempunyai kudrat akal dan jasmani yang hebat, adalah diharapkan untuk terus menceburi bidang sains dan teknologi agar umat Islam kelak mampu memiliki kemandirian teknologi yang lebih jauh ke hadapan.

Apabila remaja memiliki jalur berfikir sedemikian, hal ini dapat membantu mencetuskan minat remaja untuk mendalami ilmu sains dan teknologi yang berasaskan kepada kesedaran tentang maju mundur umat Islam hari ini.

Kini negara kita sudah mampu untuk menghantar angkasawan sendiri ke ruang angkasa dengan bantuan teknologi negara rakan kongsi. Adalah diharapkan kelak kita dapat membina roket serta kapal angkasa sendiri untuk menghantar angkasawan kita meneroka alam angkasa atas kapasiti teknologi yang kita miliki sendiri.

Kesimpulan

Kemandirian teknologi yang diharapkan memerlukan upaya berfikir secara saintifik, kreatif dan inovatif. Sistem pendidikan yang menyerapkan kemahiran berfikir yang diperlukan bakal menghasilkan para saintis dan jurutera yang kemudiannya berkebolehan membangunkan teknologi menurut acuan sendiri.

Kemandirian teknologi yang berpaut kepada akar budaya, bahasa dan agama kita sendiri akan mampu mewujudkan masyarakat berteknologi yang masih utuh jati dirinya serta unik dan unggul khazanah ilmunya.

[Baca]

A Hypocrite As Our Diplomat-in-Chief - By John R. MacArthur (LATEST UPDATE - 19/12/08)

WHEN IT COMES to foreign affairs, Barack Obama seems like a serious person with an authentic liberal's concern about the health of the world beyond our borders. After all, he campaigned for president in Berlin and his blurb appears on the back of a book by Reinhold Neibuhr, the great liberal theologian and internationalist.

But so far, the president-elect's Cabinet choices make a joke of the liberals who backed him in the hope that something fundamental might change in America's belligerent behavior abroad. As the neo-conservative Max Boot approvingly observed, the appointment of Gen. James Jones as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the retention of Robert Gates as defense secretary "could just as easily have come from a President McCain."

So too, in principle, could that of hawkish Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, which makes Obama's rhetoric of restraint in foreign affairs begin to sound as empty as President Bush's professed skepticism about "nation building" eight years ago during his race against Al Gore.

It's worth recalling that in the second debate with Gore, Bush even smirked at the concept: "I think what we need to do is convince people who live in the lands they live in to build the nations. . . . I mean, we're going to have kind of a nation-building corps from America? Absolutely not. Our military is meant to fight and win wars. . . . And when it gets overextended, morale drops."

He had that right. Indeed, you wouldn't recognize the pre-emptive war fanatic of post 9/11 if it weren't for Bush's earlier statement during the debate in support of the U.S.-led bombing of Yugoslavia/Serbia during the Kosovo crisis of 1999. It was then that the Clinton administration initiated its own pre-emptive war - in response to Serbia President Slobodan Milosevic's alleged "genocide" against the Kosovar Albanians. The three-month bombing campaign was conducted under the auspices of NATO, not the United Nations, and thus was every bit as illegal under international law as the American invasion of Iraq, in 2003. At the time, Kosovo was formally part of a sovereign Yugoslavia and NATO could not argue that the Milosevic regime had threatened or attacked a NATO member.

Hillary Clinton favored both pre-emptive wars, and was particularly aggressive in the case of Serbia, according to Gail Sheehy's book, Hillary's Choice. Sheehy quotes Hillary's recollection of a talk with her husband: "I urged him to bomb." Challenged by the president on the possible consequences - for example, more executions of ethnic Albanians and damaging the NATO alliance - Hillary replied, "You cannot let this go on at the end of a century that has seen the major holocaust of our time. What do we have NATO for if not to defend our way of life?"

At the very least, this was a gross exaggeration. Serb repression of Kosovo's national aspirations, while often brutal, was nothing resembling a "holocaust," and the Kosovo Liberation Army's provocation, including the assassination of Serb policemen, helped worsen the conflict. No doubt Milosevic was a very bad man, but that didn't stop U.S. special envoy Robert Gelbard from calling the KLA, in 1998, a terrorist organization. Civilian casualties on the two sides are impossible to pin down accurately, but they appear to have been comparable, perhaps 2,000 Albanians killed by Serb forces and 1,500 Serbs killed by NATO warplanes in Belgrade and elsewhere.

This all may be blood under the bridge, but it gives us an insight into the shoot-first temperament of the future secretary of state. According to former Clinton adviser Dick Morris, "Hillary has a Manichean view of issues, splitting the political world into dueling forces of good and evil. . . . She sees herself as idealistic, moral, and righteous, and can only conclude that those with opposing views must have opposite motives."

After Bush offered his solidarity with the Clintons over bombing Belgrade, Hillary was happy to return the favor over bombing Baghdad. In her Oct. 10, 2002, Senate speech explaining her vote for war authorization, she declared that "perhaps my decision is influenced by my eight years of experience on the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue in the White House watching my husband deal with serious challenges to our nation." Like little Serbia's oppression of its Albanian minority and its alleged threat to the American "way of life"?

Politician to the core, Hillary couldn't resist the following hypocrisy: While she wanted "to ensure that Saddam Hussein makes no mistake about our national unity and support for the president's efforts to wage America's war against terrorists and weapons of mass destruction," she insisted that her vote was not "a vote for any new doctrine of pre-emption, or of unilateralism, or for the arrogance of American power or purpose."

Well, they say you can't have it both ways. And trying to may well have cost Hillary the presidency, since Obama's early stance against the war is what gave him a leg up in the primaries.

But it's not Hillary's bellicose positions that are surprising. As a long-standing member of the Washington policy establishment and a "humanitarian interventionist," it's easy to see why she went along with the received political wisdom on Kosovo and Iraq.

What's harder to understand is why Obama - elected on a platform of greater prudence - chose a trigger-happy hypocrite, who once mocked his "lack of experience" in foreign affairs, to be his diplomat-in-chief. I suspect it's because the next president has no intention of genuinely getting out of Iraq - that he will make symbolic withdrawals of combat brigades, but plans to make permanent most of the 14 military bases constructed since the invasion.

Furthermore, I think that his foolish commitment to troop escalations in Afghanistan - much of which will come from troops transferred from Iraq - represents continuity with the Bush Doctrine more than it does rupture.

In the end, maybe Hillary and Barack don't make such an odd couple. We won't know for sure, however, until a Democratic Party-sponsored cluster bomb - dropped in the name of women's rights and democracy - kills a lot of women and children in a village near Kandahar.
[Baca]

The Best and the Brightest Led America Off a Cliff - By Chris Hedges (LATEST UPDATE - 19/12/08)

The multiple failures that beset the country, from our mismanaged economy to our shredded constitutional rights to our lack of universal health care to our imperial debacles in the Middle East, can be laid at the feet of our elite universities. Harvard, Yale, Princeton and Stanford, along with most other elite schools, do a poor job educating students to think. They focus instead, through the filter of standardized tests, enrichment activities, advanced placement classes, high-priced tutors, swanky private schools and blind deference to all authority, on creating hordes of competent systems managers. The collapse of the country runs in a direct line from the manicured quadrangles and halls in places like Cambridge, Princeton and New Haven to the financial and political centers of power.

The nation’s elite universities disdain honest intellectual inquiry, which is by its nature distrustful of authority, fiercely independent and often subversive. They organize learning around minutely specialized disciplines, narrow answers and rigid structures that are designed to produce certain answers. The established corporate hierarchies these institutions service—economic, political and social—come with clear parameters, such as the primacy of an unfettered free market, and with a highly specialized vocabulary. This vocabulary, a sign of the “specialist” and of course the elitist, thwarts universal understanding. It keeps the uninitiated from asking unpleasant questions. It destroys the search for the common good. It dices disciplines, faculty, students and finally experts into tiny, specialized fragments. It allows students and faculty to retreat into these self-imposed fiefdoms and neglect the most pressing moral, political and cultural questions. Those who defy the system—people like Ralph Nader—are branded as irrational and irrelevant. These elite universities have banished self-criticism. They refuse to question a self-justifying system. Organization, technology, self-advancement and information systems are the only things that matter.

“Political silence, total silence,” said Chris Hebdon, a Berkeley undergraduate. He went on to describe how various student groups gather at Sproul Plaza, the center of student activity at the University of California, Berkeley. These groups set up tables to recruit and inform other students, a practice know as “tabling.”

“Students table for Darfur, no one tables for Iraq. Tables on Sproul Plaza are ethnically fragmented, explicitly pre-professional (The Asian American Pre-Law or Business or Pre-Medicine Association). Never have I seen a table on globalization or corporatization. Students are as distracted and specialized and atomized as most of their professors. It’s vertical integration gone cultural. And never, never is it cutting-edge. Berkeley loves the slogan ‘excellence through diversity,’ which is a farce of course if one checks our admissions stats (most years we have only one or two entering Native Americans), but few recognize multiculturalism’s silent partner—fragmentation into little markets. Our Sproul Plaza shows that so well—the same place Mario Savio once stood on top a police car is filled with tens of tables for the pre-corporate, the ethnic, the useless cynics, the recreational groups, etc.”

I sat a few months ago with a former classmate from Harvard Divinity School who is now a theology professor. When I asked her what she was teaching, she unleashed a torrent of obscure academic code words. I did not understand, even with three years of seminary, what she was talking about. You can see this absurd retreat into specialized, impenetrable verbal enclaves in every graduate department across the country. The more these universities churn out these stunted men and women, the more we are flooded with a peculiar breed of specialist. This specialist blindly services tiny parts of a corporate power structure he or she has never been taught to question and looks down on the rest of us with thinly veiled contempt.

I was sent to boarding school on a scholarship at the age of 10. By the time I had finished eight years in New England prep schools and another eight at Colgate and Harvard, I had a pretty good understanding of the game. I have also taught at Columbia, New York University and Princeton. These institutions, no matter how mediocre you are, feed students with the comforting self-delusion that they are there because they are not only the best but they deserve the best. You can see this attitude on display in every word uttered by George W. Bush. Here is a man with severely limited intellectual capacity and no moral core. He, along with “Scooter” Libby, who attended my boarding school and went on to Yale, is an example of the legions of self-centered mediocrities churned out by places like Andover, Yale and Harvard. Bush was, like the rest of his caste, propelled forward by his money and his connections. That is the real purpose of these well-endowed schools—to perpetuate their own.

“There’s a certain kind of student at these schools who falls in love with the mystique and prestige of his own education,” said Elyse Graham, whom I taught at Princeton and who is now doing graduate work at Yale. “This is the guy who treats his time at Princeton as a scavenger hunt for Princetoniana and Princeton nostalgia: How many famous professors can I collect? And so on. And he comes away not only with all these props for his sense of being elect, but also with the smoothness that seems to indicate wide learning; college socializes you, so you learn to present even trite ideas well.”

These institutions cater to their students like high-end resorts. My prep school—remember this is a high school—recently built a $26-million gym. Not that it didn’t have a gym. It had a fine one with an Olympic pool. But it needed to upgrade its facilities to compete for the elite boys and girls being wooed by other schools. While public schools crumble, while public universities are slashed and degraded, while these elite institutions become unaffordable even for the middle class, the privileged retreat further into their opulent gated communities. Harvard lost $8 billion of its endowment over the past four months, which raises the question of how smart these people are, but it still has $30 billion. Schools like Yale, Stanford and Princeton are not far behind. Those on the inside are told they are there because they are better than others. Most believe it.

The people I loved most, my working-class family in Maine, did not go to college. They were plumbers, post office clerks and mill workers. Most of the men were military veterans. They lived frugal and hard lives. They were indulgent of my incessant book reading and incompetence with tools, even my distaste for deer hunting, and they were a steady reminder that just because I had been blessed with an opportunity that was denied to them, I was not better or more intelligent. If you are poor you have to work after high school or, in the case of my grandfather, before you are able to finish high school. College is not an option. No one takes care of you. You have to do that for yourself. This is the most important difference between them and the elites.

The elite schools, which trumpet their diversity, base this diversity on race and ethnicity, rarely on class. The admissions process, as well as the staggering tuition costs, precludes most of the poor and working class. When my son got his SAT scores back last year, we were surprised to find that his critical reading score was lower than his math score. He dislikes math. He is an avid and perceptive reader. And so we did what many educated, middle-class families do. We hired an expensive tutor from The Princeton Review who taught him the tricks and techniques of taking standardized tests. The tutor told him things like “stop thinking about whether the passage is true. You are wasting test time thinking about the ideas. Just spit back what they tell you.” His reading score went up 130 points. Was he smarter? Was he a better reader? Did he become more intelligent? Is reading and answering multiple-choice questions while someone holds a stopwatch over you even an effective measure of intelligence? What about those families that do not have a few thousand dollars to hire a tutor? What chance do they have?

These universities, because of their incessant reliance on standardized tests and the demand for perfect grades, fill their classrooms with large numbers of drones. I have taught gifted and engaged students who used these institutions to expand the life of the mind, who asked the big questions and who cherished what these schools had to offer. But they were always a marginalized and dispirited minority. The bulk of their classmates, most of whom headed off to Wall Street or corporate firms when they graduated, starting at $120,000 a year, did prodigious amounts of work and faithfully regurgitated information. They received perfect grades in both tedious, boring classes and stimulating ones, not that they could tell the difference. They may have known the plot and salient details of Joseph Conrad’s “Heart of Darkness,” but they were unable to tell you why the story was important. Their professors, fearful of being branded political and not wanting to upset the legions of wealthy donors and administrative overlords who rule such institutions, did not draw the obvious parallels with Iraq and American empire. They did not use Conrad’s story, as it was meant to be used, to examine our own imperial darkness. And so, even in the anemic world of liberal arts, what is taught exists in a moral void.

“The existence of multiple forms of intelligence has become a commonplace, but however much elite universities like to sprinkle their incoming classes with a few actors or violinists, they select for and develop one form of intelligence: the analytic,” William Deresiewicz, who taught English at Yale, wrote in “The American Scholar.” “While this is broadly true of all universities, elite schools, precisely because their students (and faculty, and administrators) possess this one form of intelligence to such a high degree, are more apt to ignore the value of others. One naturally prizes what one most possesses and what most makes for one’s advantages. But social intelligence and emotional intelligence and creative ability, to name just three other forms, are not distributed preferentially among the educational elite.”

Intelligence is morally neutral. It is no more virtuous than athletic prowess. It can be used to further the rape of the working class by corporations and the mechanisms of repression and war, or it can be used to fight these forces. But if you determine worth by wealth, as these institutions invariably do, then fighting the system is inherently devalued. The unstated ethic of these elite institutions is to make as much money as you can to sustain the elitist system. College presidents are not voices for the common good and the protection of intellectual integrity, but obsequious fundraisers. They shower honorary degrees and trusteeships on hedge fund managers and Wall Street titans whose lives are usually examples of moral squalor and unchecked greed. The message to the students is clear. But grabbing what you can, as John Ruskin said, isn’t any less wicked when you grab it with the power of your brains than with the power of your fists.

Most of these students are afraid to take risks. They cower before authority. They have been taught from a young age by zealous parents, schools and institutional authorities what constitutes failure and success. They are socialized to obey. They obsess over grades and seek to please professors, even if what their professors teach is fatuous. The point is to get ahead. Challenging authority is not a career advancer. Freshmen arrive on elite campuses and begin to network their way into the elite eating clubs, test into the elite academic programs and lobby for elite summer internships. By the time they graduate they are superbly conditioned to work 10 or 12 hours a day electronically moving large sums of money around.

“The system forgot to teach them, along the way to the prestige admissions and the lucrative jobs, that the most important achievements can’t be measured by a letter or a number or a name,” Deresiewicz wrote. “It forgot that the true purpose of education is to make minds, not careers.”

“Only a small minority have seen their education as part of a larger intellectual journey, have approached the work of the mind with a pilgrim soul,” he went on. “These few have tended to feel like freaks, not least because they get so little support from the university itself. Places like Yale, as one of them put it to me, are not conducive to searchers. Places like Yale are simply not set up to help students ask the big questions. I don’t think there ever was a golden age of intellectualism in the American university, but in the 19th century students might at least have had a chance to hear such questions raised in chapel or in the literary societies and debating clubs that flourished on campus.”

Barack Obama is a product of this elitist system. So are his degree-laden Cabinet members. They come out of Harvard, Yale, Wellesley and Princeton. Their friends and classmates made huge fortunes on Wall Street and in powerful law firms. They go to the same class reunions. They belong to the same clubs. They speak the same easy language of privilege and comfort and entitlement. They are endowed with an unbridled self-confidence and blind belief in a decaying political and financial system that has nurtured and empowered them.

These elites, and the corporate system they serve, have ruined the country. These elite cannot solve our problems. They have been trained to find “solutions,” such as the trillion-dollar bailout of banks and financial firms, that sustain the system. They will feed the beast until it dies. Don’t expect them to save us. They don’t know how. And when it all collapses, when our rotten financial system with its trillions in worthless assets implodes and our imperial wars end in humiliation and defeat, they will be exposed as being as helpless, and as stupid, as the rest of us.
[Baca]

Why does the UK Retain a Handful of Colonies? To destroy the world’s taxation systems - By George Monbiot (LATEST UPDATE - 21/12/08)

If you want to know why Britain has never completed the process of decolonisation, look at two lists side by side. One is the official register of tax havens, compiled by the OECD(1). The other is the list of British overseas territories and crown dependencies(2). Over a quarter of the world’s tax havens are British property. More than half of Britain’s colonial territories and dependencies are tax havens. Strip out Antarctica, the military bases and the scarcely-habited rocks and atolls, and of the 11 remaining properties, only the Falkland Islands is not a recognised haven. The obvious conclusion is that Britain retains these colonies for one purpose: to help banks, corporations and the ultra-rich to avoid tax.

These figures scarcely do justice to the UK’s responsibility for this menace. The website Shelter Offshore, which helps people to avoid their obligations to society, has just published its list of the world’s “top 5 tax havens”(3). Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man come first. “These highly respectable British offshore tax havens,” the site tells us, “can be very attractive indeed”, offering “superior levels of investor privacy”. Privacy is the polite word for the secrecy and obstruction that helped to bring down the world’s financial systems.

Last month the British government announced that it will introduce new laws to prevent piracy: the armed forces will be allowed to detain ships and arrest suspected robbers on the high seas(4). Yet the same government offers an attractive portfolio of tropical and temperate islands in which pinstriped pirates can bury their treasure.

That comparison is unfair – to pirates. The freebooters who use these havens are responsible for thousands of times more deaths even than the notorious Abdul Hassan, known on the Somali coast as “the one who never sleeps”(5). Because of the secrecy surrounding the treasure islands, no one knows how much money they divert from developing countries. Christian Aid’s estimate – of $160 billion a year – is the lowest figure(6), though 60% greater than the international aid the poor world receives(7). The Pope suggests $255bn(8); the US research group Global Financial Integrity proposes $900bn(9). In all cases we’re talking about the means by which hundreds of thousands of lives could have been preserved in the world’s poorest countries. But Britain’s network of tax havens permits multinational companies, dodgy businessmen and corrupt leaders to snatch money from the poor.

Gordon Brown wrings his hands over the plight of the poor, and urges impoverished countries to earn more money through trade. But by keeping our tax havens open for business, this mumbling Christian hypocrite ensures that even when the poor nations do trade successfully, they are unable to keep hold of the income.

This authorised theft, of course, affects us too. We are robbed twice by these gangsters: once when they avoid the taxes the rest of us have to pay, again when the tax havens’ secret banking arrangements cause the crises which oblige us to rescue the banks. As the Tax Justice Network points out, the banking system collapsed because it became indecipherable. The banks lost confidence in each ot