1-7 May, 2017-min

2 1 - 7 May, 2017
Editorial
NEW DELHI TIMES
T
♦ By NDT Bureau
@NewDelhiTimesIN
info@newdelhitimes.com
he movements of movers and shakers
in the aftermath of the Chemical attack
in Idlib in Syria on April 4, presumably by
Assad’s forces, show no signs of abating.
Aghast at the death of over eighty people
including innocent children, US warships
fired 59 cruise missiles on April 6 at Shayrat
airfield in Syria to reflect US resolve to ‘not
accept the normalisation of the use of
chemical weapons by (non-state) actors or
countries, in Syria or elsewhere’. It is yet
not known whether Russia had
foreknowledge of the chemical attack.
To build pressure on Russia, foreign
ministers of the Group of seven
industrialised nations met on 11th April in
Lucca, Italy. The joint British-American
proposal sought to slap further sanctions
against Russia for its culpability in chemical
attack. Italy disagreed upfront saying ‘We
must not push Russia into a corner’ and
Germany also supported the Italian stance.
There could be ‘no consensus for further
sanction’, but the G7 agreed on an
independent investigation and dialogue
with Russia. Interestingly, the stated earlier
US policy of no ‘regime change’ in Syria,
has given way to an interventionist
approach. The US Secretary of State Rex
Tillerson fumed that ‘anyone who commit
crimes against the innocents anywhere in
the world’ and declared Assad regime’s
days in power are numbered. Calling Assad
‘an animal’ Trump said ‘Putin is backing a
US-Russia tug of war over Syria
person that’ truly an evil person’ and
observed it’s very bad for Russia and very
bad for mankind.
During G7 meet, Tillerson offered the first
comprehensive insight into American
approach to Syrian crisis. He spoke of a
political process leading to ‘a unified Syria,’
governed by its people, but without
Assad, envisaging an end to the reign of
the Assad family.
While reminding Moscow of the Syrian
leader’s pledge to Russia to destroy all
chemical weapons, Tillerson castigated
Moscow for having ‘aligned with an
unreliable partner in Bashar al-Assad.’
Russia has long aligned itself with the
Assad regime, the Iranians, and Hezbollah,
to further its long-term interest but US is
offering Moscow realignment with the
West. However, Tillerson spoke of
maintaining a cordial relationship with
Russia, despite differences over Syria.
As Tillerson - a long-time friend of Russiaflew
from Lucca to Moscow, President
Putin, in the presence of visiting Italian
President, drew a scary comparison with
the events of 2003. Then US representatives
in the UN Security Council had exhibited
chemical weapons found in Iraq for
initiating Iraq war.
Putin alleged Washington of hatching new
plots to strike in other parts of Syria,
including in southern suburbs of
Damascus, by planting certain substances
and accusing Syrian authorities of using
them. Russia hopes the missile strike to be
a one-time affair, not a policy shift. With
Russia’s predictability, obduracy and
reliability in foreign policy pitted against
Trump’s unpredictability and impulsive
actions, Moscow witnesses one
extraordinary Russian-American diplomatic
tango.
Amidst the contradictory voices in the US
regarding whether American priority in the
war should be elimination of ISIS or regime
change, US Secretary of Defence General
James Mattis spoke of incontrovertible
proof that Syrian government undertook the
chemical attack that prompted the
‘measured military response’.
The US took care to avoid confrontation
with Russia by forewarning Russia to
prevent casualty in the US missile attack.
The US’ military policy in Syria has not
changed as ISIS’ defeat remains the priority.
Confident that Assad regime planned,
orchestrated, and executed the chemical
attack, US is piling pressure on the Kremlin
to dump Assad. US Secretary of Defence
Malala in Lalaland
Photo Credit : AP Photo
Mattis recommended Assad to be rather
cautious about violating international law
on chemical weapons as that is a red line.
He assured continued communications
with the Russian military and the
diplomatic channels will ensure that
situation does not spiral out of control.
In an assessment as well as warning
Mattis expressed confidence that the
Russians will act in their own mutual
interests to keep tensions over Syria under
check. Though Mattis kept mum on Putin’s
allegation that the US could be setting up
new scenarios to justify more attacks on
Syrian government forces, he implied that
‘all options are on the table’.
As US, UK and France approached UN
on 13thApril over chemical attack, Russia
applied veto powers, for the eighth time
in last six years of Syrian crisis. And the
US-Russia tug of war over Syria entered a
new phase.
♦ By Tarek Fatah
Author & Columnist, Canada
@TarekFatah
tarek.fatah@gmail.com
T
wo aspects of Malala
Yousafzai’s speech
delivered to a packed House
of Commons April 12 were
notable.
The first was her failure to mention Stephen
Harper, let alone thank the former prime
minister who was behind the move to grant
her honorary Canadian citizenship.
But it was what Malala said about Muslims
and Islam that was both inaccurate and
lacking in total honesty.
Referring to the 2014 killing of Canadian
soldier Cpl. Nathan Cirillo by Muslim radical
Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, Malala said: “The
man who attacked Parliament Hill called
himself a Muslim — but he did not share
my faith. ... I am a Muslim and I believe that
when you pick up a gun in the name of
Islam and kill innocent people, you are not
a Muslim anymore.”
The problem is Malala’s words, while
eloquent, are in conflict with the reality of
today, and incompatible with 1,400 years
of Islamic history.
Yet it drew applause from the audience,
hungry for any medicine that would dull
the pain caused by the growing cancer of
Islamic terrorism.
That said, when it comes to Islamic history,
someone might have asked Malala about
the 17th century Ottoman Caliphate’s
siege at the Gates of Vienna, or perhaps
the 11th century plundering of India by
invading Islamic armies of Central Asia.
But since she is all but caged by her PR
handlers, the media seldom get to ask her
tough questions.
For example, would Malala say the Arab
invasions of Persia, Jerusalem, Damascus
and Egypt, “had nothing to do with
Islam”?
How about the slaughter of Prophet
Muhammad’s very own family? Or the
assassinations of three of the first four
caliphs of Islam by Muslims?
Within hours of Malala’s speech, a young
Muslim journalism student inspired by Karl
Marx and Che Guevara, from Malala’s
ancestral Swat region of Pakistan, was
lynched. A Muslim mob of university
students accused Mashal Khan Yusufzai
of being an Islamophobe. Because he was
a Muslim, he had thus, in their view,
committed blasphemy.
The 23-year old student was shot, beaten
to a pulp and was about to be burned before
police intervened, while the bloodthirsty
crowd shouted “Allah O Akbar”.
Earlier in the day, as Malala spoke in Ottawa,
all MPs, including 12 Muslims who had
voted for Pakistan-born MP Iqra Khalid’s
motion M-103 against “Islamophobia”,
cheered.
When I asked them to comment on the “anti-
Islamophobia” lynching in Pakistan, not
one responded, not even the three born in
that region.
If there was any more evidence needed to
show how M-103 can be misused as a tool
against secular Muslims commenting
critically on Islam, Mashal Yusufzai’s death
provided it.
What is required from us Muslims is a bit of
truth and honesty.
Malala and the rest of us should face the
reality of what our Qur’an says when
confronting Kaafirs (infidels and
Islamophobes, including Muslims like
Mashal, who were labelled as such).
Qur’an (47:4) “When you meet the
Unbelievers (Kufaar, non-Muslims) in
fight, smite at their necks; At length, when
you have thoroughly subdued them, bind
a bond firmly on them.”
Quran (8:12) “Remember your Lord
inspired the angels: ‘I am with you: give
firmness to the Believers (Muslims): I will
instil terror into hearts of the Kufaar. Smite
them above their necks, and smite all of
their finger tips off them’.”
It is time for all of us to be truthful instead
of living in Lalaland.
www.newdelhitimes.com