Author: Yameen Rasheed

Comment: Ghettoes of the mind

They say the wealth of volumes it contains

Outnumbers the stars or the grains

Of sand in the desert. The man

Who tried to read them all would lose

His mind and the use of his reckless eyes.

… said Caliph Omar, describing the Great Library of Alexandria before commanding his soldiers to destroy it, in Jorge Luis Borges poem ‘Alexandria, AD 641’

Over a thousand years later, modern man finds himself, much like the legend of the book-burning Caliph, face to face with all the world’s knowledge – the manuscripts and parchment now replaced by signal bits flowing through the electronic veins of the World Wide Web into which the globe has become intricately interwoven.

The volume of information generated every 48 hours now exceeds the sum of all the words uttered by mankind since the beginning of time until the 21st century, according to Eric Schmidt, former CEO of Google – an Internet behemoth consumed by the idea of indexing “all the world’s knowledge”, having taken up the challenge of painstakingly scanning every book ever printed, capturing every image, collecting every video, and recording every musical note.

If informed debate is the catalyst that strengthens democracy, and communication the antidote to war, then the Internet has provided an inexhaustible source of illumination, and an unprecedented platform for billions of people to engage with each other.

And yet, a curious thing has happened. The avalanche of papers, viewpoints, analyses and thoughts has left in its wake a society that appears to be increasingly unreceptive to fresh ideas.

Reality distortion field

The discerning Caliph’s observation that “The man who tried to read them all would lose his mind” is especially true of the Internet.

Recently, Google rolled out a feature by which a person’s search results would return content recommended by friends and family who are likely to share his opinions. Unknown to the user, his search results are already being tailored based on a number of other factors, including his reading habits, location and previous search terms.

Perceptive users of social networks like Facebook would notice algorithms carefully designed to weed out content posted by non-like-minded ‘friends’ from appearing on their activity feeds – resulting in their ‘Wall’ being plastered with views they largely agree with.

In other words, the web is increasingly becoming a deceptive mirror, telling one exactly what he wants to hear.

This collateral censorship due to skewed results tends to create a bubble around users, steeping them in a confirmation bias that results in highly polarized views, which is evident from volatile, emotionally charged comments on the Internet, often over trivial matters.

As with real life, polarised extremities can rarely engage in healthy, democratic debate.

It is easy to observe the balkanisation of the web simply by identifying the cartels of blogs and personal websites. Liberal bloggers link to one another. Islamist websites feed off each other’s content. Christian blogs share gossip in their own closed loops. Creationist networks cite each other as sources. Atheist campaigners pat each other on the back. Environmentalists. Conservatives. Anarchists. Nationalists.

Not only are people becoming increasingly isolated in self imposed online ghettoes, but the gated communities are becoming mutually hostile and blindly dogmatic than ever before.

The scepticism of climate change deniers towards easily verifiable statistics demonstrates this phenomenon, as does the fanatic’s contempt towards established science.

The Internet has made it incredibly easy to find out and learn about other peoples and cultures, other religions and perspectives, other views and opinions. And yet, the Internet is also where racists, bigots and supremacists have found refuge.

Despite thousands of scholarly articles, research papers, scientific publications and public archives available freely online, the Internet is also a place where conspiracy theorists continue to thrive, carefully avoiding the zones of enlightenment.

In other words, users intimidated by the bewildering expansiveness of available information can become ensconced in a comfortable, personally tailored reality that the Internet is happy to provide.

Thought Control Protocol

Cult leaders, dictators and fanatics are known to confiscate and burn books by dissidents and ‘heretics’, in order to ensure their followers’ unwavering adherence to ideology.

The combined knowledge of antiquity went up in flames in Alexandria, and plunged civilization into darkness and wasted centuries. While the modern-day Caliphs cannot quite burn down the intangible web – they have figured out that it can be regulated or, even better, replaced.

The People’s Republic of China effectively hides one-fifths of humanity behind their Great Firewall, blacking out entire concepts, ideas, and incidents from history.

The famous satellite photograph of the Korean Peninsula taken at night, that shows an isolated North Korea plunged in darkness, in stark contrast to the brightly lit South illuminated from coast to coast, also accurately illustrates the North Korean regime’s absolute black out of information from its citizens, cloaking them in a terrible darkness.

In the aftermath of the ‘Twitter revolutions” across the Middle East, Iran is reportedly pressing ahead with plans to move its entire online population to a “private, regulated Internet” within two years, cutting them off from the rest of the world.

As with political mullahs elsewhere, the Iranian clergy deny they have any political motives (perish the thought!) Instead, they have put forward the honourable, time-tested justifications of “protecting Islamic values” and “preventing corruption of the youth from evil, Western influence”.

Myanmar and Cuba also have private nation-wide networks, designed similarly with noble intentions of preventing their innocent citizens from eating from the forbidden tree of knowledge.

The unrestricted, untamed power that the Internet bestows into the hands of ordinary people has made it the bane of theocracies and other dictatorships seeking rigid control.

The collapse of a brutal, 30 year old dictatorship in two weeks bears testament to its immense capabilities – and the reason why politicians are increasingly clamping down the Internet, including in the West.

Even young democracies like the Maldives have shown symptoms of this malady, with the present government banning several websites deemed to be critical of the Ministry of Islamic Affairs and the political party that controls it.

The desire to control and censor information in the Internet age is the surest sign of authoritarianism, and should rightfully alarm proponents of democracy.

Even when the censorship is self-imposed and cultivated by a desire to live in a tailored reality, then also, democracy is equally threatened.

Democracy thrives on free flow of information. To achieve this, it is not sufficient to just bring down authoritarian regimes, but one also must break down mental barriers that form the walls of the Internet ghettoes and reach out to the other side.

For democracy to survive, one must boldly confront views that are often unpleasant, patiently hear out ideas that are uncomfortable, and acknowledge voices that disagree with oneself – because, as it turns out, it is exceedingly easy to be wilfully ignorant, despite having the world’s knowledge at your fingertips.

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: The Israel hypocrisy

On Monday June 6 the Adhaalath Party released an ominous statement claiming that allowing the Israeli national carrier El Al to fly to the Maldives is “a threat” to the country’s economy and statehood.

Maldivian authorities have announced that the airline could begin operations in December this year.

In a valiant effort to shoulder the unwieldy burden of speaking for the 1400-year old Islamic faith, the Adhaalath Party has responded to the news by threatening “nationwide protests”, exhorting citizens “who love their religion” to join them.

It has become absurd theatre to watch the Mullah reach for the raw teats of the Arab-Israeli conflict, and milk the tragedy for all it is worth.

Hawks and doves

First, the facts – the world has overwhelmingly recognised the need for Palestinian statehood.

In his 2009 address to the Muslim world at Cairo, President Barack Obama reaffirmed US support for a two-state solution, recognising both parties as having “legitimate aspirations.”

In perhaps the most pro-Palestinian speech by a US President in history, Obama also asserted in a major speech last month that “the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines”, while also calling for full and phased withdrawal of Israeli military forces from Palestine.

Various polls show that a majority of Palestinians and Israelis support the idea of two states co-existing peacefully side-by-side.

Pope Benedict XVI, Bishop of Rome, and leader of the billion-strong Roman Catholic Church, has also thrown his weight behind the idea of Palestinian statehood. Celebrities, left-leaning Israeli parties, public intellectuals and several high-profile Jews and Jewish organisations around the world have also lent their support to the Palestinian cause.

Why, then, has this convoluted tangle remained unsolved for decades?

Perhaps the answer partly lies in the reactions to the US President’s conciliatory speech.

While Obama’s statements were well-received among Palestinian lobbyists, the right-wing militant Hamas wasted no time in heaping scorn on it. On the other side of the fence, within hours of the US government’s announcement that it “does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements”, hawkish elements in the right-wing Israeli government announced the construction of 1500 more housing units in occupied Jerusalem.

Peace, unsurprisingly, is not welcome by those whose politics depend on division and hatred.

Selective outrage

The Adhaalath party has stated that “the government should not establish ties with oppressive states that violate international human rights conventions.”

Fair enough. But one must wonder why this magnanimous vision is not being applied uniformly to our ties with the rest of the world.

Why does this party not take the moral high-ground on our ties with China? After all, that country has, by numerous accounts, oppressed the people of Xinjiang and Tibet regions for over half a century.

During Chairman Mao’s infamous Great Leap Forward, between 200,000 and one million Tibetans – of whom Muslims form the largest minority – lost their lives. To this day, the Tibetan government operates in exile and their displaced populations have little hope of returning to their homeland.

Why does the Mullah not demand “nationwide” protests against the twice daily flights operating from India – a country that, according to Amnesty International and various other Human Rights NGOs – has continued to exercise brutal military control over Kashmir since 1947?

Apologists for the “boycott Israel” camp insist there is an as-yet-unexplained “difference” between the Palestinian situation and the rest of the world’s humanitarian crises.

Don’t the Kashmiris, who have been fighting for a homeland and self-representation in the most militarised region of the world for a full year longer than Palestinians, find equal sympathy in the heart of the otherwise easily outraged Mullah?

There are, after all, 1.5 million refugees from the vivisected remains of Muslim-populated Kashmir, according to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights.

Why should the mass-graves unearthed in Kashmir be less of a humanitarian catastrophe than Palestinians going without gasoline?

And why doesn’t the big-hearted Mullah condemn the Kashmiri Islamists as well? Surely, the murder and displacement of over 400,000 Kashmiri Hindus, which the US Congress declared an act of ethnic cleansing in 2006, qualifies as a crime against humanity?

Pray why haven’t the Mullah’s minions gathered outside the Turkish Embassy in Male’ with their pitchforks?

Surely, the Turkish government’s continued denial of justice for the genocide of hundreds of thousands of Armenians – by burning, poisoning, drowning and marching till exhaustion – counts as “violating Human Rights conventions”?

If the Mullah contends those wounds have been healed and forgiven by the passage of time, then perhaps he could also explain his meek silence over the ongoing genocide in Darfur – an area approximately the size of Spain.

Even the Sudanese authorities have officially admitted to a death toll of nearly 20,000 since 2003 – which outnumbers the total Palestinian deaths over the last three decades. Aid agencies on the ground in Darfur have estimated about 400,000 dead as a result of systematic ethnic cleansing, aided and funded by the Sudanese government.

A party that can issue swift press releases condemning the President’s dance moves can certainly spare a word of condemnation for the war crimes in neighboring Sri Lanka, and perhaps organise “nationwide” protests against their airlines as well.

The Maldives continues to maintain ties with undemocratic, repressive regimes throughout the Middle East.

Syria has killed over a thousand Muslims and erased the whereabouts of another ten thousand over the past two months.

Bahrain has ruthlessly cracked down on doctors and nurses attending to injured Muslim protesters.

Should we also reconsider our ties with Pakistan in the light of increasing evidence that points towards decades of sponsored terrorism that has cost numerous lives in bombings of Mosques and market places?

If the argument is that Palestine deserves a special consideration because of the holy sites present there, then the shouldn’t the esteemed Mullah be the first to demand that the Maldives cut off all ties with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia – a nation that violates numerous International Human Rights conventions, and is widely alleged to have tortured thousands of its own citizens?

The answer in all these cases, one might reasonably expect, is an unreserved “No”.

Why then does the Mullah vent his spleen so selectively over just one nation – Israel – with a passion and vehemence that he denies for all the other inhuman atrocities taking place in the world?
What explains the Mullahs’ double standards in singling out just one nation – Israel – while maintaining healthy relations with the United States, Italy, England and Australia – all of whom have allegedly ‘wronged our Muslim brothers’ by participating in a global war on abstract concepts?

This two-faced approach towards foreign policy is patently dishonest, disingenuous, and riddled with bias. Genuine empathy and humanitarian compassion is unconditional and transcends all petty distinctions of race, ethnicity and artificial geographical boundaries.

In that context, what is being passed off as ‘humanitarian concern’ by the Adhaalath party, unfortunately, smacks of mere political opportunism.

Sovereign Republic or Arab Satellite state?

A nation is truly sovereign when its leaders have both the will and capacity to take independent decisions that places at its heart the best interests of its citizens.

A note-worthy example is India – the first non-Arab nation to establish diplomatic relations with the PLO, and well-known champion of the Palestinian cause, that nevertheless maintains strong defense and diplomatic ties with Israel.

An indicator of their successful foreign policy would be that despite being a severe critic of Israeli military misadventures in Lebanon and Gaza, India emerged on a 2009 poll conducted on behalf of the Israeli Foreign Ministry, as the most “pro-Israeli” nation in the world ahead of the US!

The sovereignty of Dhivehi Raajje is put under a cloud by those who place Arab priorities above the interests of Dhivehin.

The Maldives was the second nation – and the first Muslim nation – in the world to recognise the state of Israel. Israel became the first modern country to send an ambassador to the Maldives in 1965, during the reign of the Sultan Mohamed Farid.

When the Indian Ocean tsunami struck in 2004, Israel was among the first nations in the world to respond with emergency relief measures. Israeli Magen David Adom has provided training and support to Maldivian armed forces, police and fire departments.

Israeli medical volunteers from ‘Eye from Zion’ have conducted free treatment camps in the Maldives late last year, in a bid to strengthen friendly relations between the two nations.

However, just as with the Hamas and the Far-Right parties in Israel, Maldivian Islamist groups responded to the extended olive branch with claws and daggers.

If hostility seems insurmountable, it is because there are those who cannot stand the idea of peace.

Era of Peace and Dialogue

According to Maulana Jamil Ilyasi, who led an official delegation of the All India Organization of Imams and Mosques, a body representing over 500,000 Imams across India, to Israel in August 2007, “The time for violence has come to an end, and the era of peace and dialogue between Muslims and Jews has begun”

The Senior Indian cleric also called upon Pakistan to recognize the Jewish state, saying “The Jews I have met here say that we are all children of Abraham, part of the same family… The Muslims in India should come and see things for themselves.”

According to Transport and Communications Minister Adil Saleem, 500 Maldivians have traveled to Israel this year – and history bears witness that people-to-people exchanges are the surest way of ensuring lasting peace and mutual understanding.

Those who willfully spurn all attempts at peace have no moral authority to complain about violence.

So when vested interests claim that an Israeli airline would threaten the country – it is a blatant attempt at fanning the fires of hostility.

This so-called “threat” to our statehood and economy comes only from those who seek to stoke baseless controversy for mere political drama.

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected].

–

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Dead babies do not lie

The decomposing corpse of a dead baby was found in a polythene bag, in the park near the mosque in Hulhumale’ yesterday. The baby was possibly strangled to death by an underwear wrung tightly around its frail neck.

Two days ago, a three month old foetus was found discarded in a tin can, hidden in the bushes on the adjacent island of Vilingili.

Earlier this month, the corpse of another foetus was found underwater at the swimming track in Male’, with cuts and wounds to its head and limbs.

Just a few months ago, yet another baby was found – still breathing – abandoned near a cell phone tower in Hulhumale.

Much has been written about the apparent increase in such cases, and the need to bring the perpetrators to justice.

But even as the tide of outrage swells and recedes with each breaking story of a dead or mutilated baby found abandoned in the islands, there is the issue at the heart of the matter that the worthy, indignant citizens have yet to address.

Dhivehi social attitudes, dictated by religious mores that lay greater stress on appearances and labels than on any visible code of conduct or value system, have created a society where pre-marital and extra-marital sex is widely prevalent and tolerated, but open discussions on contraception and sex-education is still taboo.

We don’t need no education

Dr Mauroof Hussein, reportedly the sole contender for vice-presidency of the Adhaalath party, complained on his personal blog in 2009 about a public ad for contraception. In the same post, he equates ‘safe-sex’ education allegedly provided by counsellors to senior students on one island, to “fornicating without getting pregnant”.

Referring to condoms as “one of the pillars of the modern uncivilization(sic)”, he also expresses worries about having to enlighten his own child about such immorality as knowledge of safe sex.

While the good doctor calls the public interest ads ‘immoral and stupid’, the dead babies discarded in tin cans and polythene bags would suggest otherwise.

World over, the mullah, the bishop and the rabbi have united to advocate striking the fear of God into the hearts of potential sinners as the ‘only solution’ to prevent unplanned pregnancy, but until such day as this can be achieved, there clearly needs to be steps taken to generate greater sexual awareness among the young and sexually active.

One of the great travesties of clerical opposition towards reproductive sciences is their adamant stance that sex-education is somehow the same as encouraging young men and women to engage in ‘fornication’.

This rather unfortunate fixation of the mullah on ‘fornication’ blinds them to the fact that sex-education does not, in fact, involve classroom orgies – and that it is ignorance that results in thousands of unplanned teenage pregnancies every year, not condom ads.

Adolescents and teenagers desperately need the tools of education, not the shelter of ignorance, in order to understand and deal with the rapid physiological and hormonal changes occurring in them.
In a society where convicted paedophiles proudly strut about in the streets, or run Qur’an centres that provide unlimited access to young children, a well-rounded, early sex-education could ensure that young children are well-equipped to identify and guard themselves against sexual abuse.

Young men and women who are well-informed about protective sex, venereal diseases, and the nature and risks of contraception, STDs and pregnancy are much less likely to engage in irresponsible sexual behaviour than those that aren’t.

Abstinence-only education, on the other hand, shies away from openly discussing matters of reproduction, and has failed spectacularly in tackling the issue of pre-marital pregnancies – even though the influence of the Church and the Mosque means that billions continue to be poured down this endless drain.

In the absence of readily accessible scientific information about sex, young people turn to dubious pornographic websites, exaggerating peers and commercialized sex in music videos that objectify women, contain demeaning lyrics and gives exactly the wrong message.

Without a clear understanding of sex in the proper social and biological contexts, or proper scientific understanding of the consequences, it is hardly surprising that young Maldivians frequently engage in risky sexual behaviour – resulting in hundreds of unplanned pregnancies.

An undesired pandemic

According to reports, two of the babies found in the past months were foetuses, ripped prematurely from the womb. The other babies were also seemingly discarded immediately upon birth, with the placenta and umbilical cords still attached.

It doesn’t take NASA to figure out these were botched attempts to deal with undesired pregnancies.

Abortions are illegal in the Maldives, except if the mother’s life is at risk, or the child suffers from a severe congenital defect.

While there is plenty of anecdotal evidence of Maldivians flying to neighbouring ports of India and Sri Lanka to have their unwanted pregnancies ‘fixed’, many teenagers and other young people are unable to afford such trips and find themselves staring at a lifetime of severe social stigma and ostracism, as well as the added pain and humiliation of public flogging by the long arms of Maldivian justice.

What results is a gut-wrenching nightmare that makes for uncomfortable reading.

While in some another countries, the women could have approached a qualified doctor and terminated the pregnancy in a safe, controlled manner – in the Maldives, the task falls into the hands of unqualified quacks and shady ‘uncles’.

Some are repeatedly punched in the stomach to force a miscarriage. Others have objects such as knitting needles and coat hangers inserted into the vagina to tear the amniotic sac. The risk of potentially fatal infections and perforated intestines in these cases cannot be understated.

Girls, often as young as 12, have illegal prescription drugs, poisonous herbs, fabric bleach, kerosene and other toxic concoctions pumped into their uterus, sometimes with fatal results.

Worldwide, 21.5 million women underwent unsafe abortions in 2008, according to a paper published by the World Health Organization in 2011.

The WHO also estimates that 5 women die every hour from botched attempts at abortions.

Research compiled by the Guttmacher Institute in February 2011 suggests over 47,000 women die every year from complications resulting from risky abortion procedures, including hemorrhage, sepsis, shock and multiple organ failure – accounting for about 13% of all maternal deaths.

Of those who survive, over five million suffer from long term health complications, according to a 2009 paper titled ‘Unsafe Abortion: Maternal Mortality’ by Dr Lisa B. Haddad and Dr. Nawal M. Nour.

With almost half of all induced abortions worldwide deemed to be unsafe, Dhivehin need to acknowledge that this issue transcends mere crime and punishment, or mere outrage at aborted foetuses.

It is quite literally a matter of life and death for hundreds of young girls who find themselves in the loneliest spot in the world – caught in a situation that they’re either too immature or ill-equipped to deal with, finding the young promise of the rest of their lives suddenly snatched away, and having absolutely no one – no family, or support group, or NGO, or doctor to approach.

The tiny corpses unearthed across the capital region could be explained – if not justified – as the result of sheer panic and emotional distress, but the lives of hundreds of young women are at risk every day at the hands of a society that won’t extend a safety net of empathy, support – or safe abortion rights.

The combined grip of social stigma, lack of sex-education and awareness, an insensitive legal system, absent support and rehabilitation process and an emerging section of society that seeks to address every problem with the much favoured tools of intimidation and shame has left society vulnerable to making murderers out of unwed mothers.

These are ugly realities that the Government and Dhivehi society equally refuse to confront, and choose to stow away instead – much like the dead babies hidden away in the bushes.

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Shariah not a solution

Yesterday, the Adhaalath party organised a large rally at the tsunami monument in Male’, to demand the implementation of Islamic Shariah in the Maldives.

The party was joined by “hundreds” of pseudo-religious NGOs whi lent their collective voice to the clamour for Shariah, supposedly an antidote to ‘murder, violent assaults, robbery, rape and drug abuse’ in the country.

“The whole nation is threatened and institutions have failed,” the party said in a statement. The ‘only solution’, according to large banners put up across Male’, is Islamic Shariah.

What the Adhaalath Party and its friends fail to mention here is that by ‘Islamic Shariah’, they’re referring to a single interpretation of Shariah suitable to their rigid world-view – a minority opinion among the world’s many Muslim schools of thought that all hold different views of Shariah.

Lady Injustice

One common criticism of clergy-controlled Shariah is the perceived injustice towards women. While these concerns are often met with heated denial, they’re also backed up by cold statistics.

In 2009, then Minivan News Editor, Mariyam Omidi, wrote a damning report highlighting the strong gender discrepancy in the meting out of punishment for ‘fornication’ in the Maldives. According to government statistics cited in the report, out of 184 people sentenced to lashing for ‘fornication’ under Shariah law, 146 were women.

Following his verdict in June 2005, a judge in the criminal court, helpfully offered his opinion that women were ‘deceptive creatures’ according to the scriptures.

Almost exactly two years later, another judge ruled that the gang-rape of a 12 year old girl by four axe-wielding men who’d broken in through her bedroom window, was ‘consensual sex’, because the child didn’t scream audibly enough.

Last week, Mukhtar Mai, a woman who was gang-raped and dragged out naked in front of 200 higher-caste men in her village in Pakistan, had her hopes dashed when the courts upheld a ruling by semi-literate, tribal judges against her.

Given these realities, and a long series of cases where Muslim women have been punished for the crime of getting raped, one awaits an answer from the proponents of Sharia as to why a woman should ever step into their courts expecting justice.

Judge, Jury and Executioner

In Islamic Shariah, there is no jury, no defense lawyers, no prosecutors, no pre-trial discovery process, no courts of appeal, no cross-examination of witnesses, no legal precedents, and perhaps most damaging of all, little room for modern evidence.

Former State Minister of Islamic Affairs, Mohamed Shaheem Ali Saeed, while graciously acknowledging the validity of long established forensic methods of DNA profiling, stated that such evidence could only be used as ‘supplementary’ evidence, presumably while relying primarily on eye-witness testimonies, as practised in Arabia 1400 years ago.

Furthermore, due to the lack of separation of powers in Islamic Shariah, the Mullah is literally the judge, jury and executioner on whose shaky whims the mortal life of the accused rests.

Coupled with the severe lack of capable judges, this is often a recipe for disaster.

Dr. Tarek Al-Suwaidan, a prominent Muslim scholar, blamed the poor quality of modern Islamic jurists on a curriculum that is limited to only subjects related to traditional Islamic jurisprudence.

Highlighting the necessity of familiarity with international law, and current commercial, copyright and cyber-crime laws, he prescribed a minimum requirement of at least a bachelor’s degree in business, law or other specialized field before candidates enrolled for Shariah studies.

Maldivian courts, on the other hand, are plagued by severely under-qualified judges with barely primary level schooling who, according to a February 2011 report by the ICJ (International Commission of Jurists), have also failed to act in an impartial manner.

Political farce

The ‘absolute Shariah’ practised in Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan gives credence to Syrian Scholar Muhammad Shahrur’s theory that jurisprudence in the name of God is a farce by those wanting to maintain political power.

Photographs available in the public domain show the former Taliban government in Afghanistan showing off dead bodies of dissenters hung from poles in public, with their severed penises stuffed in their mouths.

In 2007 alone, at least six cases of torture and custodial death were brought against the muttaween, the Saudi Arabian religious police entrusted with enforcing a rigid Shariah state. In one case, a man was beaten to death for being in ‘illegal seclusion’ with an unrelated woman.

In May 2002, the religious police in Mecca prevented school girls from escaping a burning building as they were not wearing the ‘correct Islamic dress’, and to prevent physical contact between the girls and civil firefighters, which they feared might have caused ‘sexual enticement’.

Over forty people suffered severe burns that day, and 14 girls burned to death.

In the Islamic Republic of Iran, the basij militia brutally cracks down on pro-democracy activists in Universities and streets of Tehran, thereby prolonging the Ayatollah’s political reign in the guise of ‘upholding Islamic Shariah’.

The lack of judicial oversight or accountability, coupled with the promise of absolute power, has made Shariah an irresistible proposition for the Islamist political movement.

The political implications of a ‘Shariah’ legal system was painfully obvious in the original draft of the Maldivian Religious Unity Regulations of 2010, which forbade, among several other things, the criticism of ‘religious scholars’, and airing of any views on religion that contradicted the views of a select few who, very conveniently, happened to be the ones drafting the regulation.

Uncodified Law

When a Maldivian man publicly declared his lack of faith to a visiting preacher last year – he was met with a curious reaction.

On the one hand, the preacher on stage, in a long-winded response, ruled that Islam didn’t demand the death of all apostates. On the other hand, by day break, another set of preachers from a local NGO had issued an outright demand for his state sanctioned murder, failing an immediate repentance and conversion.

The dramatic contrast in judgement between the self-declared experts that – under a Shariah law system –  would’ve literally meant the difference between the man’s life and death, brings to the forefront the problem of Shariah not being a codified system of law.

There have been several attempts within the Islamic community to correct this grievous flaw, by compiling Shariah laws into a standard code. But observers note that since Islam has no central authority to universally  enforce such a codified law, it would depend on compliance, rather than enforcement.

Until such day, the law literally is whatever the Mullah with the gavel says it is.

The deterrence argument

Citing Islamic Shariah, the Maldivian Parliament recently introduced a proposed amendment to the Clemency Act, which would uphold a death sentence passed by the Supreme Court.

The proponents of the death penalty claim that it would act as a deterrent against violent crimes.

As it happens, a New York Times survey in 2000 revealed that American states which practise the death penalty have for decades shown consistently higher homicide rates than states that didn’t. FBI data for 2008 shows that murder rates were up to 101% higher in states that implemented capital punishment than those that didn’t.

According to Amnesty International, evidence shows that the faint threat of a possible future execution does not, in fact, enter the mind of a potential murderer in the throes of violent rage, mental illness, calm cold-bloodedness, or sheer panic.

Human Law

A vast majority of the world’s Muslims live under secular, constitutional law.

Even though laws in Pakistan and Malaysia are influenced by Shariah,  they have regular courts and cede ultimately authority unto the constitution, rather than the clergy.

Many secular countries like Britain, India and the Philippines allow religious discretion in civil and domestic affairs governing marriages, divorce and inheritance, but for criminal cases, they all employ modern law – with constitutional remedies, inviolable rights, principles of equality before law, provisions for appeals and the benefit of forensic evidences that has helped ensured justice for rape and murder victims even several years after a crime is committed.

A new thinking

In a sermon at the American Centre of the National Library last year, Imam Khalid Latif said that even non Muslims and people guilty of various sins felt free to openly speak their minds to the Prophet, without fear or hesitation, and fully expecting a patient hearing.

Times have clearly changed, as Islamist resentment against differing opinions has increasingly expressed itself as violent attacks on intellectuals and liberal reformists, further expanding the shadow of fear and intimidation under which Islamists operate.

Ibn Rushd, the celebrated philosopher from the Islamic Golden Age, also said that revelation and reason are not contradictory, but complementary.

Swiss born intellectual Professor Tariq Ramadan, one of Foreign Policy magazine’s Top 100 Global Thinkers of 2009, argues that the Qur’an should be interpreted in the changed historical context of modern times.

Citing a German law demanding equal treatment of sexes as an example of  proper Shariah, Ramadan asserted that “There are laws coming from non-Muslim minds that are more Islamic than laws coming from Muslim minds in Islamic countries.”

Indeed, those who swear by the immutability of God’s law, ignore the fact that Shariah has been compiled, polished, amended and refined by Islamic jurists for centuries after the Prophet’s death.

Dr. Abdul Fatah Idris, Head of Comparative Jurisprudence at Al-Azhar University agrees that with changing times, the traditional classical jurisprudence is no longer sufficient, and a ‘new thinking’ is required to deal with a changing society.

The failure of Islamic Shariah in modern times reflects this failure of the clergy class to adapt to changing times.

As with others before them, politicians in the Maldives are projecting an alluring vision of an idealistic sin free society to a disgruntled public as ‘Shariah’ – ignoring the fact that it has been a staggering, disastrous failure in every other modern nation that has experimented with clergy justice.

While loudly touted by vested interests as ‘the only solution’, Shariah is unfortunately ill-equipped to solve the average modern Muslim’s daily problems, and unlike modern law, has demonstrably failed to ensure justice and security for men and women in every part of the Muslim world.

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Doublethink culture

On the night of December 21, 1954, a cult of worshipers gathered together in a room in Chicago.

Having carefully removed all metallic objects from their person, including bra straps and metal zippers, they sat together in a silent huddle. Many of them had quit their jobs and colleges, left their spouses and sold their houses in preparation for that night.

They wouldn’t need any of those where they were going – for indeed, they were awaiting the arrival of a flying saucer that would take their small group of true believers away before the prophesied end of the world the next morning.

As it turned out, the flying saucer never arrived – and the world continues to spin majestically over half a century later.

Having their superstition proven so utterly false, one would reasonably expect that the cult would have disbanded and died out immediately afterward.

But, as chronicled in the famous book ‘When Prophecy Fails’, written by a group of authors who had infiltrated the cult to observe them first hand, the cult actually grew in strength after the failure of their central prophecy.

One of those authors, Stanford psychologist Leon Festinger, famously described this phenomenon as ‘cognitive dissonance’.

According to this theory, when faced with incontrovertible proof against a held belief, people tend to eliminate the dissonance by resorting to either denial or justification.

The cult members, upon realising that their alien saviors failed to show up, promptly decided that the Earth had been given a second chance as a reward for their night-long perseverance. Armed with this new theory, the formerly media-shy cult went on a recruiting drive and the cult expanded more than ever.

Cognitive dissonance would also explain the resurgent practice of ‘Baccha baazi’ in Afghanistan, where powerful warlords and other self-described Muslim men engage in pederasty with ‘bacchas’ or pre-pubescent dancing boys, attired in women’s clothing.

The men candidly admit to the practice on camera, denying that it was sodomy because they were not ‘in love’ with the boys, and providing the justification that they were able to judge the young boys’ looks beforehand, unlike the niqab covered women where it was more of a hit-and-miss.

In the dark alleys of Bangalore and Mysore in India, the hashish and heroin trade is known to be run by old Muslim men with prominent prayer marks on their forehead where it touches stone five times a day,

They too, justify their actions with an assortment of explanations about profits and business.

In these cases, one appears to have an inner moral conflict, as is clearly visible in the confused expression of the pious old Dhivehi woman with a fondness for traditional raaivaru and folk songs, when suddenly confronted with a religious ruling on TV from the leading sheikh of the day that music is forbidden.

The dissonance is then placated by subconsciously finding a convenient explanation that flies in the face of available statistics, just as a smoker finds a justification to smoke, or a motorist finds a justification to not wear helmets or seat belts.

The theory of cognitive dissonance is often used to explain the unintentional hypocrisy of individuals and social groups.

In the Maldives, however, it appears that hypocrisy has given way to something far more unpleasant – namely, self-deception.

The Ministry of Truth

As described in the dystopian society portrayed in George Orwell’s novel 1984, Maldivians seem to have embraced the practice of ‘doublethink’.

The novel describes doublethink as :

“To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancel out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it… to forget, whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again.”

Perhaps due to remarkable upheavals in their recent history, Maldivians appear to have mastered the art of effortlessly holding two utterly incompatible, conflicting ideas in their head.

The anecdotal evidence is overwhelming.

A casual stroll down the Artificial Beach in Male or the neighboring islands during the night reveals dozens of young girls – proudly wearing the Islamic head scarf – in various stages of embrace, undress or coitus with their partners under the veil of darkness.

There’s the story of the outwardly devout graphics designer who declined an assignment to draw a female figurine, citing religious principles. Notably, the man was later found to be downloading explicit pornography on his office workstation.

During one energetic debate on Facebook, one of the most vocal defenders of the faith was a young man with a colorful vocabulary. In case his demeanor and menacing threats didn’t make his tough gangster credentials clear, he also spelled out, in bright red letters, on his profile image, ‘Blood, Sex and Booze’.

To be precise, the young Maldivian man, who swore by ‘blood, sex and booze’ on a public social network, was the first to step in to defend morality and religion against perceived threats.

These are hardly isolated cases.

There are plenty of Maldivians who proudly embrace the creed that Islam is a ‘religion of peace’ and that those that create conflict are not ‘true Muslims’, but in the same breath, applaud Bin Laden, the Taliban, and other random militants who place bombs in schools, markets and mosques in Pakistan as righteous ‘mujahideen’ whose actions are sanctioned by the religion.

Young girls and boys, often wasted on drugs and given to casual sexual relations, often vocally argue for the imposition of an un-codified ‘Shariah’ law system that, if implemented, could very well see them stoned to death or worse.

The national doublethink is no doubt helped by the country’s dramatic swing from a heady, westernised disco-era to a rigidly conservative religious society almost overnight.

The 2008 Maldivian constitution forbids any law or regulation that contradicts loosely defined ‘tenets of Islam’.

In May 2010, the Maldivian government invited salafi preacher Zakir Naik who, during a heavily promoted lecture televised on prime-time national television, proclaimed to a gathered audience of ten-thousand, that income made from tourism was ‘haraam’.

But as recently as last week, the President of the Republic, Mohamed Nasheed, reiterated that the tourism industry – fueled by alcohol and, as the Mullah prefers to put it, ‘fornication’ – is the mainstay of the country’s economy that must be safeguarded at all costs.

The easily inflammable pseudo-religious groups that assemble on the streets at a moment’s notice to protest against everything from news editors to co-education, gathered in in late 2009 to protest against the restricted sale of alcohol in ‘inhabited’ islands.

Nevertheless, their screeching rhetoric against the sale of alcohol in the capital was in stark contrast to their meek acceptance of the availability of alcohol on the adjacent airport just five minutes away.

It could also be contrasted with their monk-like silence on the widespread child abuse and pedophilia, reports of which have hit local media with alarming frequency throughout the past year.

The same government alternatively claims that tourism is haraam and absolutely vital. The same television channel that plays music throughout the day also airs religious programs that proclaim music is forbidden. The same school that teaches that bank interest is forbidden in Islam also teaches students modern banking, and how to calculate interest.

The effect of this national doublethink on the young Maldivian democracy is a cause for concern.

Citizens who have given up the intellectual tools of reasoning have also inadvertently given up their ability to choose, leaving the country vulnerable to either sliding back into a dictatorship, or morphing into a theocracy.

Confirmation bias

The first comment on a recent Minivan News article about alleged bestiality involving the rape of a goat on a rural island, incredibly enough, appeared to blame the incident on ‘LIBERAL DEMOCRACY’.

This is further evidence that the Maldives is steeped in a strong confirmation bias, where the population disregards evidences that are in plain contradiction to their viewpoints, but jumps at even unverified hearsay supporting their prejudices.

Fifth grade science teachers have reportedly taught their students that the Apollo moon landings were ‘fake’, thereby insulting the achievements of thousands of scientists and engineers, while simultaneously robbing young students of the wonders and amazement of science, leaving them vulnerable to a lifetime of conspiracy theories.

Meanwhile, tiny moon rocks have been on display for years at the National Museum in the Maldives.

Openly biased reporting on the Middle East abound in the local media, as are outlandish conspiracies such as the easily discredited allegations that a team of Israeli doctors were ‘organ stealing Zionists’.

If this keeps up, Maldivians as a nation will be no better than the alien cult worshipers, who bend reality to suit their convenience and bask in an atmosphere of mutual-misinformation.

The vital essence of a successful democracy is the ability of its citizens to make critical judgments.

Once that ability is clouded by confirmation bias, dissonance and doublethink, the end-result closely resembles the confusion and noise that characterises Maldivian society today.

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]

Likes(2)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Politics and religion

As the heady winds of revolution sweep across the Middle East, a startling moment last week proved to be a sobering eye-opener.

Former IAEA chief and Nobel Laureate Mohamed El-Baradei had to retreat from the polling booth without casting his vote after a crowd of Islamists threw stones at him.

It marks the precise moment when realisation hit global media outlets that the Egyptian revolution, which was fueled almost entirely by educated, liberal and non-ideologically driven youth, has been hijacked by Islamists.

Some might argue that with 77 percent of voters in favour of the referendum, which El-Baradei opposed, democracy has clearly spoken and that the issue merits no further discussion. But in fact, it needs more scrutiny than ever.

Who watches the watchmen?

On the walls of Cairo, posters signed by the Muslim Brotherhood were put up declaring that it was the ‘spiritual obligation’ for all Muslims to vote in favour of the referendum, which many believe gives the Brotherhood – the only organised opposition – a strong edge in short term elections. It is an outcome that many secular Egyptians, and the large Coptic Christian minority in Egypt are loathe to see.

In each of those posters lies one of the most crucial questions of our times – can democracy survive under the shadow of Islamism?

Democracy, by its very nature, relies on the ability of a population to use its free will and judgment to make informed decisions. When the writing on the wall literally ordains the faithful to vote in a particular fashion, upon no less an authority than God himself, whence lies the free will of the people?

There’s an inherent conflict of interest when an Islamist party enjoins upon the people, by invoking the name of God, to vote in a manner most suitable to its own political ambitions.

Nevertheless, Muslim democrats have, time and again, failed to challenge the Mullah on the impropriety of his partaking in politics on the platform of religion.

In what is an affront to both religion and democracy, deep issues of faith and morality, with their strong emotive underpinnings, have ended up as mere political tools for manipulating crowds and gathering votes.

The ramifications of this convenient marriage between politics and religion are not hard to spot.

With the Arab freedom movements engulfing it from all sides – Syria in the north, Yemen in the South, Bahrain in the east, and Egypt, Tunisia and Libya in the west – a frantic Saudi Arabian interior ministry was quick to pull out the preemptive religion card.

The Saudi state media carried the following statement:

“The Council of Senior Clerics affirms that demonstrations are forbidden in this country. The correct way in sharia of realising common interest is by advising, which is what the Prophet Mohammad established… Reform and advice should not be via demonstrations and ways that provoke strife and division, this is what the religious scholars of this country in the past and now have forbidden and warned against.”

It is disingenuous at best for the Wahhabi-monarchy nexus in Saudi Arabia to claim that Islam forbids protests against a ruler, considering the Saudi monarchy itself was established by a series of conquests beginning with a pan-Arab revolt against no less an authority than the Islamic Caliphate.

The enormous utility of religion as a political tool was reaffirmed by the Taliban’s strong run in Afghanistan, imposing one of the harshest theocracies in recent memory.

Democracy is all but lost in Pakistan as well, where at least two senior politicians have recently been murdered in broad daylight for refusing to toe the line of the hard line clergy that wields influence over an increasingly radicalised Pakistani society.

Misuse of religion also remains the predominant political gimmick in the Maldives.

Former President of the Republic, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, had no qualms about asserting himself as guardian of the faith, constantly hammering in the notion that the ‘100% Muslim’ nation’s cultural identity was defined entirely by its religious homogeneity which had to be protected against ever-present, invisible threats – an assertion that has put a paranoid Maldives in the list of top ten countries of the World noted for religious intolerance, according to a study by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life in 2009.

Outlandish theories brimming with conspiracy have found a mainstream foothold in the Maldives, with self-proclaimed “religious” groups protesting for weeks against a visit by Israeli “Zionist organ-stealing” doctors, displaying a fanatic zeal rarely before seen in public and certainly never exhibited for causes like rampant pedophilia and child abuse.

Highly-charged religious rhetoric permeates issues ranging from education to foreign policy; politicians privately admit to being unable to vote on bills in Parliament on merit, because of the guaranteed backlash from the clergy class.

The already indistinct line between fanatic militants recruiting youth in the islands, and the intolerant ideologues openly preaching on public podiums is increasingly blurred.

In one episode, the Maldivian government website of the Ministry of Islamic Affairs posted an article declaring the Haiti earthquake, where 316,000 people lost their lives and a million were left homeless, as the ‘wrath of God’ showered upon a deserving, wicked people.

The danger with that kind of rhetoric is, of course, that it creates a loophole where any Tom, Dick and Harry can – and will – assume the high seat of arrogance and presumption from which they unravel the divine reasoning behind everything from natural calamities to personal tragedies.

Following a report on the recent tragedy in Male’, where two women lost their lives in a fire that engulfed their home, a commentator was quick to ascribe it to ‘the wrath of God’, insinuating the deceased were deviants who deserved their tragic end, simply because he disagreed with their lifestyle.

Me Tarzan, You infidel

In the heydays of the reform movement in the Maldives, the pro-government media regularly depicted opposition leaders as Christian missionaries bent on destroying Islam.

Similarly, opposition propaganda channels exploited the religious insecurities of the public by presenting the ruling party as depraved alcoholics and homosexuals.

One political party with religious affectations, the Adhaalath Party, even took the former President – a religious scholar – to court on apostasy charges.

There appears to be not a single political party in the Maldives that has not indulged in the cheap political abuse of religion by abandoning discussions of governance and policy in favour of petty fear-mongering and emotive politics.

In this atmosphere of whipped up religious paranoia, a book by former Attorney General Hassan Saeed and Professor Abdullah Saeed of Melbourne University, titled ‘Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam’ was banned in June 2008, amid accusations that Hassan Saeed would introduce freedom of religion if elected to power.

At the time, Hassan Saeed reportedly responded by claiming the ban was a “cowardly Act driven by a 30 year-long leadership that has made Islam as a political tool.”

That moment of lucidity, however, proved to be short-lived. Following a viewer poll on national TV regarding religious freedom in December 2009, Hassan Saeed’s own party repeated, almost verbatim, the exact same allegations against the present government – accusing it of attempting to import “other religions” into the country to “undermine Islam”.

In the first week of March 2011, the opposition-allied political party People’s Alliance (PA) accused the government of following the agenda set by ‘Zionist Jews’, and mentioned ‘irreligious’ people in the government.

The next week, MDP MP Ahmed Rasheed invoked the scriptures when calling for an amendment to the Clemency Act to uphold the death penalty.

The bill was co-sponsored by Independent MP Muttalib who has in the past found time to introduce bills of such national importance as rescinding the right of resident foreigners to worship in the privacy of their bedrooms – while crucial bills like the Evidence Act continue to be delayed.

Another MP further argued that even the country’s requisite Foreign Policy could be gleamed from a single verse in the holy book.

Gag Orders

As with other countries, religion, in the hands of politicians, has transcended its spiritual role, and entered the domain of fear in the Maldives.

The rhetoric of the Mullah has reached a point where the media – the fourth pillar of democracy and defender of free speech – has spinelessly retreated into a shell of self-censorship and servitude.

Articles mildly critical of Islamists have been retracted after being published. Websites critical of Islamist parties have quietly been banned. Lifestyle magazines have been forcibly shut down after relentless harassment and intimidation from pseudo-religious groups, while authorities conveniently turn a blind eye.

The prevailing climate of fear prevents legitimate questions about the involvement of ‘religious’ NGOs in terrorist activities, and their role in promoting violent rhetoric, child abuse and abuse of women from being widely asked.

The few remaining liberals who dare raise these issues are confronted with reactions that range from the bizarre to the comedic.

In May 2010, the Adhaalath Party posted an article on its website with the fantastic claim that Minivan News was promoting ‘lesbianism’ and ‘national sissyness’.

The incredible claim, unfortunately, is symptomatic of a society where discussions are quickly ended by painting feminists as ‘lesbians’ and unilaterally declaring secular opponents as ‘atheists’ and ‘Zionists’ – a society characterised by paranoia, fear-mongering and dysfunction in the name of religion. In other words, a society where democracy cannot survive.

Each of the stones thrown at Mohamed El-Baradei represents an attempt to silence critique, to overwhelm reason with violence, to suppress disagreement with intimidation, an attempt to abort democracy in the womb.

One prays for the sake of Egypt’s rich civilization that their hopes for democracy do not get consumed by the petty fires set by self-appointed representatives of God.

The ancient Nile, after all, bears witness to a long chain of mortals who assumed the mantle of religion, only to end up mistaking themselves for God.

The Indian Ocean doesn’t.

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

The ‘Mad Dog of the Middle East’

Former State Minister Mohamed Shaheem Ali Saeed recently joined a chorus of world leaders denouncing Libyan strongman Muammar-al-Gaddafi, calling him a “wicked, cruel” man.

“Wicked” and “cruel” might not be entirely out of place to describe the eccentric colonel who has ruled Libya with an iron fist for four decades, and virtually given his loyalists a free license to hunt down pro-democratic protestors, even as Human Rights groups pegged the current death toll at over 2000.

In his first interview on State-run television after the uprising began earlier this month, Gaddafi appeared wearing a hat with ear-flaps, holding an umbrella in the rain, leaning outside a vehicle resembling an armoured Tuk-Tuk outside the bombed ruins of his residence.

Thus, in a world that has seen colourful dictators ranging from Idi Amin to Kim Jong-Il, Gaddafi has steadfastly managed to hold his own, and occasionally push the envelope even further.

Addressing a loyal crowd gathered at the Green Square in Tripoli on Friday, he alleged that the revolts were sparked by youth under the influence of mind-altering pills mixed into milk and Nescafe by al-Qaeda. Fantastic claims like these have led to even traditionally timid, conservative media to label the ageing dictator outright insane.

Analysts reject any role of the al-Qaeda in the ongoing Middle Eastern democratic revolutions that has toppled long-reigning dictators in two of Libya’s immediate neighbours, and ended a two decade emergency in another.

According to Al-Jazeera, several international Libyan diplomats and military commanders have abandoned Gaddafi. On Friday, the Libyan ambassador to the US, Ali Aujali, who resigned earlier this month, hoisted the pre-Gaddafi era national flag at the Libyan Embassy in Washington, D.C.

Having already lost control of the Eastern half of his country, Gaddafi sought in vain to employ the nexus between the state and the mosque to deter protestors on Friday.

In a sermon aired on national television, the speaker was quoted as preaching “As the prophet said, if you dislike your ruler or his behaviour, you should not raise your sword against him, but be patient, for those who disobey the rulers will die as infidels.”

Ironically, Muammar al-Gaddafi himself came to power in a coup against Libyan King Idris in 1969, as a dashing, popular 27 year-old colonel.

As a teenager, he was strongly influenced by the fiery Arab Nationalist rhetoric of Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt, and was once expelled from school for organizing a pro-Nasser student protest.

Inspired by Chinese Revolutionary leader Mao Zedong’s ‘Little Red Book’, Gaddafi also penned a three volume ‘Green Book’, with the subtitle ‘The Solution to the Problem of Democracy’, in which he outlined his philosophy of ‘Islamic Socialism’. The book was also reportedly distributed in the Maldives by former Maldivian President, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.

In his book, Gaddafi notes that in an ideal state, the government disappears to pave way for the rule of the people. But 40 years later, Libyans are finding it tough to convince their leader to follow his own advice.

King of Kings

Analysts have struggled to understand the unpredictable, erratic and bizarre ways of Gaddafi.

During his 42 years in power, Gaddafi has never been the President or a party leader. The title he holds is “Brotherly Leader and Guide of the First of September Revolution.”

He has reportedly accumulated a massive fortune of 60 billion dollars over the years, and exhibits a taste for flamboyant, flowing robes and aviator sunglasses.

Gaddafi’s eccentric nature made global headlines during a 2007 visit to France, when he arrived with an entourage of over 400 staff, a fleet of armoured limos, a giant heated tent, and a camel. His 40 member security detail, often called the ‘Amazonian guard’, consists of han-dpicked voluptuous virgins trained in body combat, who all sport lipstick, eye-liner and sometimes high-heels, and are trained killers who never leave his side day or night. Despite the public claims of chastity, several reports state that they frequently provide sexual favours.

In a conservative region where women are traditionally restricted, Gaddafi hails his sharply dressed female security team as a sign of women’s empowerment.

Gaddafi has also never shied away from provoking controversy or antagonizing world leaders, leading the former US President Ronald Reagan to label him the ‘Mad Dog of the Middle East’.

In what has been variously been described as choreographed buffoonery or downright megalomania, he stormed out of a 2009 Arab Summit in Doha after asserting himself as “the dean of the Arab rulers, the king of kings of Africa, and the Imam of all Muslims”.

In fact, a year earlier, Gaddafi did indeed proclaim himself the ‘King of Kings of Africa’, during a ceremony attended by over 200 traditional African kings and tribal leaders.

John Simpson of the BBC recounts an unforgettable interview with Gaddafi, where the Libyan leader repeatedly broke wind loudly throughout the conversation.

Gaddafi’s foreign policy is as odd, whimsical and mercurial as his personality.

Time Magazine reported that following the arrest of Gaddafi’s son, Hannibal, in Geneva for allegedly beating up two servants, he cancelled commercial flights between the two countries, withdrew $5 billion from Swiss Bank accounts and shut down local offices of Swiss companies Nestlé and ABB.

Gaddafi even submitted a proposal to the UN to abolish Switzerland and divide it up along linguistic lines, awarding the parts to Germany, France and Italy.

At various points during his reign, he expelled up to 25,000 Italians and 30,000 Palestinians from Libya, and closed down US and British military bases.

He has also converted a Catholic cathedral in Tripoli into a mosque named after Nasser.

In 1975, Nasser’s successor in Egypt, Anwar al-Sadat, called Gaddafi “100 percent sick and possessed by the devil”.

In a meandering, long-winded address to the UN General Assembly in 2009, described by some Arab diplomats as ‘vintage Gaddafi’, he offered to move the UN headquarters to Tripoli, demanded an inquiry into the assassination of John F Kennedy, suggested that Swine Flu was a Western conspiracy, and reiterated an earlier demand for Israel and Palestine to be united into a single state called ‘Isratine’.

In one frenzied moment, Gaddafi tore up a copy of the UN Charter, refuted its legitimacy – and referred to the UN Security Council as a ‘terror council’.

Gaddafi’s own translator reportedly collapsed from exhaustion towards the end of his speech, which is the third longest speech in UN history – but still modest in comparison to Indian ambassador Krishna Menon’s eight-hour marathon address in 1957, whose official transcript runs into 160 pages.

During an August 2010 visit to Italy, he upset his hosts by declaring that “Islam should become the religion of all of Europe”, and gave each member of his hired audience a copy of the Qur’an.

Last Bedouin

Gaddafi loathes Islamic fundamentalists. Nearly 50 religious seminaries were reportedly shut down in the late 1980s. His harsh crackdown on radical Islam forced the Muslim Brotherhood and other groups in Libya to go into exile.

Nevertheless, in the past, Gaddafi has reportedly financed numerous militant groups, including Black September, which behind the attacks on Israeli athletes during the 1972 Munich Olympics.

In 2003, Libya formally accepted responsibility for the 1988 bombing of a Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie in Scotland, which killed all 270 people on board.

In a volte-face during the last decade, however, Gaddafi started making amendments with the West, even opening up his weapons facilities for foreign inspectors to dismantle.

In the wake of the popular revolutions, however, the West appears to have decided it is time for Gaddafi to go.

The UN Human Rights Council has unanimously suspended Libya’s membership. The US has imposed sanctions, the Swiss have frozen his assets, and France has begun investigations in the Gaddafis’ finances.

Former Libyan Justice Minister, Mustafa Mohamed Abud al-Jeleil, reportedly said that he believes Gaddafi would ultimately choose to commit suicide like the vanquished Hitler, than surrender power gracefully.
Indeed, this week, Gaddafi has defiantly vowed to arm his supporters to ‘cleanse’ Libya– a move that Angela Merkel of Germany has equated to a declaration of war against Libyan people, signalling more bloodshed.

But as former ally Hosni Mobarak could tell him, declaring war upon one’s own people is often a futile exercise.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: National University could become the engine of national growth and prosperity

One of the most promising aspects for the proponents of democratic change in the Middle East is that the ongoing Arab revolutions are largely being led by youth activists.

Unlike the stereotyped bearded conservatives and liberal communists, the current reform movements in the Arab nations have been fuelled and sustained by the region’s sizeable youth population; a study by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life reveals that 60 percent of the Middle East’s population is under the age of 30.

With a median age of just under 25 years, the Maldives also has a very young population that peaked right around the time the country achieved democracy.

Political scientists often tout these statistics as positive indications of a brighter future in these countries.

For a society to be stable, however, they contend that it is necessary to keep this young energy directed and focused on the onerous task of nation building.

One of the long awaited measures towards this end was achieved on the morning of February 15, 2011, when the Maldivian President inaugurated the country’s first National University.

In a country where the educational levels are abysmally low – only one out of five senior secondary students go on to pursue higher education – this comes as welcome news that could aim to reverse that dismal trend.

Traditionally, however, universities have been more than just institutions of learning.

In countries like Turkey, Egypt and Iran, universities have also been centres of intellectual and political activism and indeed, factories of social change.

Student unions in Eastern Europe were the focal points around which the various colour revolutions would coalesce and result in the fall of deep rooted communist regimes.

Universities have also been a hotbed of political activism in Iran, where student bodies participated in the ‘Islamic Revolution’ that dethroned the Shah and installed the Ayatollah in power. Decades later, it was once again university students that would form the core of the ‘Green Movement’, which has in recent years taken to the streets demanding democratic reform.

In the United States, a country with one of the most deeply entrenched university cultures, there has been an interesting historical trend of political ideology and beliefs on university campuses exhibiting marked departures from mainstream public views. Thus, universities have been the flashpoints of major anti-war rallies and liberal activism.

At various points of history, governments have tried to exercise control over universities and dictate the course of their youthful idealism.

One famous example is that of Nazi Germany, where the state apparatus removed books by Jewish authors, communists and other critics from the universities libraries, and burnt them in public squares.

Intellectuals, including the celebrated scientist Albert Einstein, were expelled from universities under German Law, and the Nazi Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels famously proclaimed in 1933, “Jewish intellectualism is dead”.

However, history records that Einstein would move to the United States, publish over 300 scientific papers, and spur the top secret Manhattan Project that would soon make America the world’s first nuclear nation.

A little over a decade after Goebbels’ proclamation, the book burning Nazi Germany would face an ignominious defeat, and Einstein’s adopted home would reign for decades as the world’s leading scientific, economic and political superpower.

The temptation to assert ideological control over universities has also seen unpleasant consequences in other countries like Egypt and China.

It is heartening, therefore, to see even conservative politicians like former State Minister of Islamic Affairs, Mohamed Shaheem Ali Saeed, propose that the Maldives National University should offer courses in comparative religious studies and theology – ie, study of religions other than Islam.

The traditionally isolated Maldivian has at many points struggled to deal with foreign ideas, often resulting in potentially xenophobic tendencies.

In November 2008, owners of a local water bottling plant were forced to issue a statement following controversy over the discovery of a ‘cross shape’ on the caps of the water bottles. The culprit turned out to be a faulty machine part that could not be repaired locally. Nevertheless, the company had to sand-paper the offending shape into something less controversial.

In September 2010, an Indian teacher in Foakaidhoo, Shaviyani Atoll, was reportedly tied up and forced off an island after “devout Muslim” parents mistook a compass design drawn on a blackboard for a crucifix.

Courses like Comparative Religious studies could indeed introduce diversity of thought and foster greater mainstream public enlightenment about other belief systems and cultures, which in turn would undoubtedly have a lasting effect on broader concepts of social tolerance.

One must also note the role of universities in revolutionising technology and lifestyles.

From ground breaking medical research to increasing our understanding of life and the cosmos, the thousands of academic papers published annually in leading universities have made invaluable contributions.

Innovative multi-billion dollar corporations like Google, Yahoo and Sun Microsystems have emerged from the laboratories of Stanford University, while Columbia University alone has produced nearly a hundred Nobel Laureates.

Dozens of world leaders from Margaret Thatcher to Indira Gandhi, have emerged from Oxford University, whereas Cambridge University has given the world Isaac Newton, Neils Bohr and Stephen Hawking. The first computer was invented within its walls, as was the revolutionary double helical model of DNA.

Student athletes trained in University gymnasiums have racked up scores of Olympic sports medals, whereas some of the biggest bands in the music industry have at some point shared dorm rooms while living on campus.

In every field of progress, universities and academics have traditionally been a few steps ahead of mainstream society and making giant strides into the future.

Some might be sceptical that a university in the Maldives, without the luxury of a self-contained campus or an atmosphere of academic seclusion, or even a sizeable student or faculty body can quite leave a comparable footprint on the national intellect or society, as is visible in so many other countries.

During the inauguration, however, the Maldivian President recognised the role of universities in upholding democracy and freedom of expression, and the Chancellor of the newly instituted University, former Education Minister Dr Musthafa Luthfy has promised to follow in the illustrious traditions of Oxford.

As Chancellor, he has the monumental task of directing the youth’s energy into strong intellectual and academic pursuits and to nurture a conducive, stimulating environment in which such pursuits can be undertaken without undue political control and societal intimidation – with full intellectual freedom of thought and expression; an atmosphere of research, curiosity, questioning and free inquiry that are crucial to keep the flames of intellectualism burning bright.

As a country that has only recently tasted democratic freedoms, the Maldives counts on its first National University to produce the future leadership and become engine of national growth and prosperity, while simultaneously charting the country’s destiny.

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Music: a front line of Dhivehi culture

Hundreds of young Maldivians descended on Sultans Park on Friday night for the launch of a music album by a young local artist.

Sitting in the dark shade of the trees at night, they cheered loudly as two young ladies strummed guitars to a soft melodic tune.

Music has been closely entwined with cultures around the world, from beyond the mists of time. Soaring orchestras and gentle flutes have enamoured mankind with their ability to convey, wordlessly, their deepest thoughts and most powerful emotions. So majestic is their beauty that, in many cultures, instruments like the lyre, the sitar and the harp have been associated with the divine, the heavenly.

The ancient traditions of song and dance in Dhivehi Raajje have evolved to a point where geographically disparate islands have formed their own subtly distinct styles that allow a keen ear to differentiate between, for instance, the Giraavaru tribe and their neighbouring islanders.

The accelerating beats of bodu beru drums have moved generations of Dhivehin to ecstasy and euphoria as they climaxed in a thrilling crescendo.

As it happens, the centuries old traditions that seem to be infused in the very genes of Maldivians are now facing a new kind of threat – a battle between cultural expression and religious dogmatism that has recently arrived on the Maldivian shores.

In March 2008, a gathering assembled at the Dharubaaruge Conference Centre, organised by Jamiyyathul Salaf, a religiously conservative NGO.

The backdrop on the stage had an image of a burning musical note crossed out with flames.

During the gathering, presumably held in opposition to the government’s support for cultural activities like song and dance, they released a video with 22 local lslamic clerics ruling that song and music were ‘haraam’, or forbidden in Islam.

The gathering was broken up by police, citing concerns over religious radicalisation.

Today, the first cleric to condemn music in that video montage, Adhaalath Party leader Dr Abdul Majeed Abdul Bari, is the country’s cabinet Minister of Islamic Affairs.

Among other clerics in the same video were two members of the Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs, staff members of the Centre for the Holy Qur’an, one member of the Human Rights Commission, and also a member of the MDP religious council.

Immanuel Kant, the 18th century German philosopher, suggested that one’s ability to appreciate beauty was closely tied with one’s ability to make moral judgments.

Grand symphonies of Mozart, Schubert and Bach have endured for centuries on the strength of their sheer brilliance, and the daunting complexity and elegance of their compositions that could evoke romance, passions and dark sorrows in mute observers.

However, during another sermon organised by Jamiyyathul-Salaf in 2010, titled ‘Sex, Drugs and Rock ‘N’ Roll’, preacher Abdur-Raheem Green called the attention of his audience to the music playing from the nearby Carnival stage, and alleged that the musicians playing at the venue were people with empty lives.

In his sermon, he equated music with hedonism and “worship of materialistic culture… the Qur’an of the shaithaan.”

When the Maldivian death metal band Nothnegal returned from a successful tour of Europe, what awaited them in the report of their story were several hostile comments that insisted music was forbidden in Islam, and the group’s activities were akin to ‘devil-worship’.

While the Maldivian music scene hasn’t quite come to a head-on collision with religious dogmatists the way it has in some other Islamic countries, there are some notable incidents where they have crossed paths.

Ali Rameez, arguably the biggest pop-star in the Maldives at the time, famously quit music in a very public manner, reportedly making a symbolic renunciation by dumping a large quantity of his CDs into the sea.

The lead singer of the popular music band Trio, that had recently represented the Maldives at International music events, quit music at the height of the band’s popularity and announced on his Facebook page that his decision was driven by religious considerations, as he was given to understand that music was forbidden to Muslims.

The cultural differences and the attitudes of talented musicians towards their religious duties are a fascinating study in contrast.

The famous Ghazal and Qawwali musical traditions of the subcontinent have a long and rich legacy of talented Muslim artistes, including internationally acclaimed Pakistani singer Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan.

AR Rahman, the double Oscar and Grammy winning Indian musician is also known to be a very devout Muslim.

There appears to be no clear consensus on what is considered acceptable music and what is not.

The late Sheikh Ibn Baz, former grand mufti of Saudi Arabia, rejected all forms of popular music as ‘haram’, except during weddings where it was restricted to women folk.

While many conservative scholars make exemptions for devotional songs accompanied only by the beats of a daf (a frame drum resembling a tambourine), others consider even devotional music to be taboo.

Renowned Lebanese Islamic scholar Sheikh Ibrahim Ramadan Al-Mardini rejects such religious restrictions on music, saying no such prohibition existed in the Qur’an.

He also argues that the hadith often used to justify it were “very weak”.

Opposition religious leader, Dr Afrasheem Ali, said on national television in 2008 that the Prophet himself had sung. Former President Gayoom, also a religious scholar, asserted in a speech that singing and dancing were not incompatible with Islam.

Indeed, even the definition of the term ‘singing’ appears to be equally nebulous.

The stirring qualities of rhythm, melody and tenor have been used to great effect by famous qaris like Abdul Basit Abdul Samad – who became internationally known for his spell-binding recitations of that Qur’an that inspires many imitators.

Even after ‘renouncing music’, former pop-star Ali Rameez has sung several devotional songs, many of them quite popular.

So did Rock-star Cat Stevens, who embraced Islam at the peak of his career and gave up music. Upon conversion, he took on the name Yusuf Islam, and auctioned away all his guitars.

Elsewhere, Salman Ahmad, the lead singer of iconic Pakistani rock band Junoon and arguably the greatest rock star to emerge from the Muslim world, is appealing to youth in his terrorism-plagued country to take up the guitar and reject extremism.

Cat Stevens, aka Yusuf Islam, eventually returned to music. On the eve of his album’s re-release, he explained that he had stopped performing due to his misunderstanding of the Islamic faith.

“This issue of music in Islam is not as cut-and-dried as I was led to believe … I relied on hearsay, that was perhaps my mistake”, Yusuf said.

Salman Ahmad, too, pointed out that the verses of celebrated Sufi poet Rumi “promoted harmony, tolerance, peace, self-discovery, simplicity… really, the antithesis of the religious extremists protesting on the street.”

Arguing that both rock musicians and extremists had a common target – the youth, he has vowed to undertake a new kind of ‘jihad’, one that combats what he considers the destructive power of extremism and “murderous thugs masquerading as holy men” by providing the outlet of music.

Indeed, young rock bands in the Maldives have chosen to vent their angst against political violence with powerful thrash music. Judging by the crowds that throng their shows, the message has been received well.

Gentle plucks on guitar strings have in the past summoned millions of anti-war activists, raised millions in charity, and defined entire cultural eras.

Countries everywhere use the strength of music to put together stirring verses set to triumphal tunes played by military brass bands – a shared national anthem, to signify a shared nationhood.

Maldivian bands like Zero Degree Atoll have revived cultural identities by skilfully infusing the sounds of waves and conch shells along with modern guitar riffs and bodu beru percussion, accompanying, of course, their evocative Maldivian poetry.

If the music that mingled with the Maldivian sea breeze for centuries is to survive, one would do well to heed the advice of the young man on the stage at the Sultan Park last night, who exhorted his artist and musician colleagues to defy those who discourage and object to music, and remain steadfastly committed to creating wonderful new melodies; words that would clearly be music to our ancestors’ ears.

Likes(0)Dislikes(1)