France's burqa ban: women are 'effectively under house arrest': Angelique writes at the Gaurdian UK

• 
• • Angelique Chrisafis
  • guardian.co.uk, Monday 19 September 2011 21

Hind Ahmas walks into a brasserie in the north Paris suburb of Aulnay-sous-Bois. Jaws drop, shoulders tighten and a look of disgust ripples across the faces of haggard men sipping coffee at the bar.

"Hang on, what's all this? Isn't that banned?" splutters the outraged waiter behind the bar, waving a wine bottle at her niqab. Ahmas stands firm, clutches her handbag with black-gloved hands and says: "Call the police then." But she decides there's no point fighting. We cross the road to a cafe where she's a regular. No one bats an eyelid; the boss certainly doesn't want to lose her custom. Ahmas is breaking the law by ordering an espresso and sitting in a booth in the window. But these days she is breaking the law by stepping outside her own front door.

Hind Ahmas, one of two French women facing a fine for wearing the niqab in a town near Paris

In April, France introduced a law against covering your face in public.Muslim women in full-face veils, or niqab, are now banned from any public activity including walking down the street, taking a bus, going to the shops or collecting their children from school. French politicians in favour of the ban said they were acting to protect the "gender equality" and "dignity" of women. But five months after the law was introduced, the result is a mixture of confusion and apathy. Muslim groups report a worrying increase in discrimination

Terror, tradition and good taste

By Irfan Hussain: OpEd Dawn News

THE suicide bomber who murdered Burhanuddin Rabbani, head of the Afghan High Peace Council, concealed an explosive in his turban. This is not the first time the traditional head gear has been used to hide a bomb.

Similarly, terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan have carried weapons under burkas that they have used to slaughter innocent people. They were safe in the knowledge that they would not be stopped and searched by male security staff in deeply conservative societies. And, of course, it would be an insult to ask a Pakhtun to take off his turban.

These attitudes and traditions present formidable security challenges. We all remember how Maulana Abdul Aziz tried to escape arrest during the Lal Masjid episode by donning a burka. In India, robbers wore this all-concealing garb to hide their guns in a daring hold-up in a jewellery shop.

Security forces have been unable to come up with an answer to this troubling problem. There simply are not enough policewomen available to search every burka-clad woman in public places, and it would be anathema for male cops to demand that burkas be removed. So lives will continue to be lost at the altar of tradition.

In Europe, the burka and the niqab have become the focus of another kind of scrutiny. The French law barring these garments from public spaces has been hugely controversial. Widely supported by the majority, it has nevertheless divided opinion among feminists and liberals.

In a long recent article in the Guardian exploring the impact of the law, Angelique Chrisafis spoke to a number of women who continue to wear the full-face veil, despite the legal and social problems it poses. One of them, Hind Ahmas, said that on one occasion, she was attacked by a man and a woman on the street who told her “to go back to Afghanistan”. She was also punched in front of her three-year old daughter. The journalist quotes Ahmas about how the law has changed her life.

“In my head, I have to prepare for war every time

Several countries in touch with Haqqanis: Kayani

ISLAMABAD: Reacting to US Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen’s outburst, Army Chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani has not only rejected his allegations of using the Haqqani network for waging a proxy war in Afghanistan but also pointed out that several countries were engaged with the militant group.

Pakistan's Army Chief General Ashfaq Kayani (R) listens to US Admiral Mike Mullen at the start of the NATO MC conference in Seville, Spain on September 16, 2011

A rejoinder issued by the ISPR on Friday quoted Gen Kayani as having said that Admiral Mullen’s statement was “very unfortunate and not based on facts”.

But significantly embedded within the brief rejoinder was an unspoken acknowledgment that Haqqanis were crucial for reconciliation in Afghanistan and, therefore, a number of countries, including Pakistan, maintained contact with them.

“Admiral Mullen knows fully well which countries are in contact with the Haqqanis. Singling out Pakistan is neither fair nor productive,” the army chief said.

A military official disclosed in a background conversation that the United States and a number of European countries had been talking to the Haqqanis for reconciliation. During some recent contacts, he said, Pakistan had made it clear to the US that its engagement with the Haqqani network should not be misconstrued as one meant to undermine American interests in Afghanistan.

“We worked with them for positive objectives which could have been useful for all stakeholders in the Afghan end-game,” he stressed.

Gen Kayani, the ISPR handout said, found Admiral Mullen’s diatribe disturbing because his prolonged meeting with the latter in Spain last week was “rather constructive”.

The military official said there was nothing of this sort (finger pointing) in their meeting held on the sidelines of a Nato conference, rather they had deliberated on the way forward in their soured ties, constraints in relationship, withdrawal of coalition forces from Afghanistan and the role of various stakeholders.

Contrary to his assertion, a US official, speaking to Dawn from Washington, claimed that what was now being publicly said had been conveyed personally to Gen Kayani in Seville (Spain).

The US has been accusing Pakistan for long of supporting the Haqqani network and been exerting pressure on the government and army to act against the group.

Arundhati Roy: 'The Press Decides Which Revolutions To Report'

The celebrated dissenter on the 10th anniversary of 9/11, mass uprisings in the Arab world, the Anna Hazare movement, her old comrades-in arm like Medha Patkar and Prashant Bhushan, Maoism, writing and much else.

Arundhati Roy

Rajesh Joshi: The 10th anniversary of September the 11th attacks on the US is upon us. What do you think has changed in the world, or hasn’t changed, in these years?

Arundhati Roy: Plenty has changed. The numbers of wars that are being fought has been expanded and the rhetoric that allows those wars —that are essentially a battle for resources —is now disguised in the rhetoric of the war on terror, and has become more acceptable in some ways and yet more transparent in other ways.

Perhaps the most dangerous thing that has happened is that increasingly we are seeing that these wars can’t be won. They can be initiated. But they can’t be won. Like the war in Vietnam was not won. The war in Iraq has not been won. The war in Afghanistan has not been won. The war on Libya will not be won. There is this initial pattern where you claim victory and then these occupation forces get mired in a kind of slow war of attrition. That’s also partially responsible for the global economy slowly coming apart.

The other difficulty is that the more the weapons of conventional warfare become nuclear —and all this kind of air bombing and so on —the more it becomes clear to people who are fighting occupations that you can’t win a conventional war. So, ironically the accumulation of conventional weaponry is leading to different kinds of terrorism and suicide bombings and a sort of desperate resort to extremely violent resistances. Violent, ideologically as well, because you have to really motivate people to want to go and blow themselves up. So, [it's a ] very, very dangerous time.

You have been very critical of the war on terror, especially the US policy. Would you have preferred a Saddam Hussain or a Taliban regime in Afghanistan?

Well, it does look as if the Taliban regime is going to return in Afghanistan in some form or shape. And

On Terrorism: Articles by the legendary Eqbal Ahmed

A Presentation at the University of Colorado, Boulder

October 12, 1998 

In the 1930s and 1940s, the Jewish underground in Palestine was described 

as "terrorist." Then new things happened. By 1942, the Holocaust was occurring, 

and a certain liberal sympathy with the Jewish people had built up in the 

Western world. 

At that point, the terrorists of Palestine, who were Zionists, suddenly started 

to be described, by 1944-45, as "freedom fighters." At least two Israeli Prime 

Ministers, including Menachem Begin, have actually, you can find in the books 

and posters with their pictures, saying "Terrorists, Reward This Much." The 

highest reward I have noted so far was 100,000 British pounds on the head of 

Menachem Begin, the terrorist. 

Then from 1969 to 1990 the PLO, the Palestine Liberation Organization, occupied 

the center stage as the terrorist organization. Yasir Arafat has been described 

repeatedly by the great sage of American journalism, William Safire of the New 

York Times, as the "Chief of Terrorism." That's Yasir Arafat. Now, on September 

29, 1998, I was rather amused to notice a picture of Yasir Arafat to the right 

of President Bill Clinton. To his left is Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin 

Netanyahu. Clinton is looking towards Arafat and Arafat is looking literally 

like a meek mouse. Just a few years earlier he used to appear with this very 

menacing look around him, with a gun appearing menacing from his belt. You 

remember those pictures, and you remember the next one.

G8 pledges billions for Arab uprising

MARSEILLE (France), Sept 10: Arab states that ousted their dictators got a financial shot in the arm on Saturday with promises of tens of billion of dollars to help their rocky transformation into modern democracies.G8 rich nations and institutions including the World Bank, the IMF, regional banks and the Arab Monetary Fund pledged nearly $80 billion in aid and loans over the next two years, doubling the amount promised earlier this year. French Finance Minister Francois Baroin announced the massive increase at a Group of Eight finance ministers' meeting in Marseille. The money is earmarked to support reform and help new governments weather shortterm economic instability in the wake of popular uprisings that began in Tunisia and toppled its strongman leader before spreading to Egypt and Libya. “We are facing an historical transformational moment, and while there are downsides, there is enormous enthusiasm,” International Monetary Fund chief Christine Lagarde told reporters here. Jordan and Morocco, which have not faced popular revolutions but whose kings have promised steps towards deeper democracy, joined the socalled Deauville Partnership after the initial members Egypt and Tunisia. Representatives from the four states were in Marseille on Saturday to explain to donors and lenders how they planned to relaunch their economies and to hear what help they can expect from the world's major economic powers. Officials from Libya's new government — whose fighters have taken control of most of their country but are still battling remnants of strongman Muammar Qadhafi's forces — were also in the southern French city as observers. Libya is not yet a formal member of the Deauville Parternship — named after the French town that hosted the G8 meeting in May — but has been promised it will be added to the list soon.—AFP

Trade policy sets export target at $26 billion

Trade policy sets export target at $26 billion

Approving the recommendations of Trade Policy 2011-12, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani on Saturday directed the commerce ministry to realise the immense potential for regional trade in order to enhance the country’s exports.

The trade policy aims at achieving an ambitious export target of $26 billion for the fiscal year besides seeking better market access by addressing tariff and non-tariff issues.The policy proposals would now be presented to the Economic Coordination Committee (ECC) for final approval.

After a presentation by commerce ministry officials, Mr Gilani said the government would soon hold a conference of ambassadors and trade officers with a view to giving them the task of pursuing ‘trade diplomacy’ for increasing exports.

The presentation was attended, among others, by Commerce Minister Makhdoom Amin Fahim, Finance Minister Dr Abdul Hafeez Shaikh, Planning Commission deputy chairman Dr Nadeem-ul-Haq and secretaries of finance and commerce divisions.

Commerce Secretary Zafar Mahmood briefed the meeting on the free trade agreements (FTAs) that had been concluded with Sri Lanka, China and Malaysia and the preferential trade agreements (PTAs) with Mauritius and Iran and Saarc Free Trade Area (SAFTA).

He said negotiations were in progress on the second phase of Pakistan-China trade agreement, Pakistan-Singapore FTA, Pakistan-Indonesia PTA, Pakistan-Turkey PTA, Pakistan-Sri Lanka Comprehensive Economic Partnership, Pakistan-GCC FTA, PakistanMauritius FTA, D-8, OIC PTA and ECO Trade Agreement (ECOTA).

“Other initiatives for greater market access in Asia Pacific are also continuing,” the commerce secretary said. He was hopeful about the success of the current trade policy despite the global economic situation, market access problems, energy deficiency in the country, the poor law and order situation and the scourge of terrorism.

From theatre in Karachi to numbers in Senate

The upper house of parliament is slated to get 54 new members, giving the PPP an opportunity to significantly increase its present tally of 27 seats and perhaps even grab a majority in what will be a 104-member Senate from next year

WHILE the political theatre in Sindh and verbal sparring between the PPP and PML-N supremos are grabbing the headlines, behind the political scenes attention is quietly turning towards the battle for the Senate in March.

The upper house of parliament is slated to get 54 new members (re-election to 50 general, technocrat/ulema and women seats and four new, post-18th Amendment minority seats), giving the PPP an opportunity to significantly increase its present tally of 27 seats and perhaps even grab a majority in what will be a 104-member Senate from next year.

But the possibility is generating speculation that the PPP’s otherwise inexorable march towards a dominant position in Senate may be scuttled somehow.

Could the PML-N, with only a handful of Senate seats from Punjab at present, delay the Senate election and force early general election so that new provincial and national assemblies, more favourable towards the N-League, elect the next Senate cohort?Will the security establishment, ever wary of politicians consolidating power, countenance one half of parliament dominated by the PPP, perhaps the first step towards a kind of one-party state as its rivals flounder? Are the internecine warfare and ferocious mud-slinging in Karachi part of surreptitious efforts to forestall Senate elections?

What is clear is that part of the reason for the speculation building around the Senate elections is the upper chamber’s chequered history. “This is the first time since the ’70s, other than military dispensations, that the same assemblies will elect both halves of the Senate,” remarked Nayyar Hussain Bukhari, the PPP senator who is Leader of the House.

Mr Bukhari noted that the first Benazir Bhutto government was felled before Senate elections could take place, while her second government was only able to preside over Senate elections in 1994 before being ousted in 1996.

Perhaps the most notorious example of intervention ahead of a Senate election came during Nawaz Sharif’s second, ‘heavy mandate’ term. With the capture of the Senate only months away (the election was scheduled for March 2000) Sharif was on the threshold of forcing through controversial religiously hued legislative and constitutional changes when the Musharraf coup in late 1999 wrapped up the entire elected set-up.

PPP: game, set … match?

Now, what is at stake next March are institutional and psychological advantages for the PPP.

“Understandably, our political opponents would not like to see the PPP increase its strength in the Senate to cripple our ability to legislate,”