Showing posts with label Perspective. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Perspective. Show all posts

Monday, July 2, 2012

Brain drain - a different perspective


The concept of brain drain is very old, although the term was used in the early 1950s by the spokesman of the Royal Society of London. The magnitude of the brain drain has increased in this current scenario. Good people to serve overseas immigration to other Nations is attributed as a brain drain. This phenomenon can be observed even in the history. The super power of all ages use good people of other Nations in their interest. Currently almost all the developed countries are at stake because this goes all, highly qualified professionals are migrating to United States, United Kingdom, Canada and other countries, but Pakistan is faced with this storm severely and it is becoming more violent. The desire of young people to obtain abroad is growing rapidly, and this issue is still not good.

One of the reasons for this dilemma is because of the unfair environment of good people. Problem, security threats, health problems, intense inflation, power failure, the bribery housing are some of the reasons that are good people of driving abroad and taking them to stay permanently. A considerable number of graduates are leaving abroad every year and very few returned from higher education.

Go to education top is another thing, but stay there and serve them are what brain drain. Even at the moment of the life of the Prophet Muhammad (peace). Be.upon. him), there were incidents when the Prophet (peace). Be.upon. He) sent to Muslims in a special mission to ash-Sham (today Syria, Jordan, and Palestine). Ash-Sham was ruled by the Romans, who were Christians and super power that time; they were highly trained in military technology. The Muslims were sent to the Special Mission to acquire this technology and use it to the global implementation of Islam. Another example of technology acquisition through the Persians was the second world power at that time, the Muslims working for technology by ditch to the Salman farsi (wing may be please with him) and it was used in the battle of the Trench (khandak) and played an effective role. The difference between the current scenario of the Muslims and the episode of the companions of the Prophet is that they have a vision while our individuals go abroad to own satisfaction.

Notion of brain drain is very old, is an example of the Prophet Muhammad (peace). Be.upon. the) when it ended the battle of Badr, some of the prisoners were released on the condition that they should teach 10 Muslims to read and write, this is an excellent example how the State uses others for educational programs. Another example of brain drain is sultan Mehmed 'the Conqueror of Constantinople' when used a German Orban. Orban was highly skilled in the development of cannon and making time weapons, offered his services to the Byzantine, but sultan Mehmed had very tactically driven you and offers good reward in return. Sultan gave a makeshift Foundry where he worked and produced the canon more grande of that period called 'the great Turkish bombard', which was powerful enough to break the Fort of Constantinople and this how great historic victory is won by sultan. Canon Orban could take ball of 1200 pounds (544 kg) up to a mile.

Well these are some of the examples how Islam had used non-Muslims, clearly shows us that without vision and motto, one can not brain drain, unless and until the problem is not diagnosed correctly. There is no need of vision and healthy environment for the good people and this cannot be done if the State cannot be responsible for, if the State does not take this seriously and there is no use of delivery long speeches in various seminars.

The case is bitterly regrettable, few individuals of youth feel somehow this pain in Pakistan. That the reason seminars are organized, but this issue should be properly addressed by the State and the system that drives the mass and peat. And you should be properly analysed with this historical perspective provided.




SM WAQAS IMAM is a student of univ of NED's engineering and technology. It is also editor of an E-zine univ official Ned online of engg and technology "The vision". It is also a contributor to various magazines.




Saturday, June 23, 2012

Women's suffrage - a comparative perspective


The term women suffrage refers to women's right to vote by law in national and local elections. Great social and economical movements were conducted by British women due to take the suffrage law and establish it as a legal right in the parliament. One of the earliest advocators in Britain was John Stuart Mill whose subjection of women (in 1869) was established as one of the pioneering works of that time. The first woman suffrage committee was formed in Manchester in 1865. One year later, Mill presented to Parliament this society's petition, which demanded the vote for women and contained about 1,550 signatures. On the other hand, United State is commonly known as the women's suffrage origin in 1820s, while New Zealand is credited as the first country by which women got the right to vote; (Campbell 1966) even Corsican Republic, sometimes, is considered as one of the first countries to grant female suffrage in 1788. Thus, one can claim that different countries and locals in the world, obviously, experienced such a movement at various times. With these historical points, as a woman who lived in Iran for most of her life and graduated from Law, I want to point to some social, historic and legal improvements and difficulties toward the women suffrage matter in the Middle Eastern countries and compare them to the situation in Scandinavian countries. Iran will be my ultimate focus as one of the problematic countries over women issues. Regarding this comparison between these two geographic regions, what can we grasp from the conclusion and what are the roots which make these two regions so different and even oppose to each other? And at the end to what extent, regarding this issue, we are able to improve the status quo conditions of countries like Iran?

o Women in Scandinavian countries

In this part I will, shortly represent some historical facts and points regarding women's voting rights in some Scandinavian countries as well as giving some reasons to the improvement process in these countries. According to Dictionary of World History The first European nation to grant female suffrage was Finland in 1906, with Norway following in 1913. Sulkunen states that Finland's thoroughgoing parliamentary reforms gave all adult men and women not only universal and equal suffrage, but also the full right to stand for elective office. In her analytical article looking for the reasons for the early enactment of voting rights in Finland and modern Finnish democracy, she points to some factors about the country's overall cultural mould and how relations between the sexes were constituted in the field of conflicting pressures between a strong nationalist tendency, traditional agrarianism, and the democratization of social life. "No real place was left over for women's issues per se, yet women were very visibly present in all reform-oriented activity. With the notable exception of the upper social classes, women also did not really perceive their social and political rights to be at odds with the rights of men in their own class. On the contrary, they considered themselves to be largely on an equal footing, seeing men as comrades and allies in the struggle to win a better life for all socially, politically and judicially downtrodden people." (2000) Later in her article, she claims that the issue of voting rights thus did not offer a basis for the spreading of a conflict between the sexes in Finland. "Instead, it produced fertile ground for a snowballing socialist movement of which the Social Democratic Party, formed in 1899, took advantage." Already by the mid-1890s, the workers' movement together with the worker-led temperance movement had expressed its support for universal and equal suffrage for men and women. Their programme, which also included the demand for prohibition, was launched with panache amongst the masses during the so-called oppression years. In the year 1906 Finland made an almost revolutionary leap from having one of Europe's most archaic systems of representation to having one of the most radical ones. As a result, all adult women in Finland were the first in Europe to receive full rights of representation. (ibid:2000)

Claréus believes that there are some clear evidences of the influence of the feminist movement of the 1960s and 1970s giving rise to an increasing range of concerns and styles among Scandinavian women. (1989) According to Greg Hurrell, the battle for equal rights in Norway started in the Nineteenth century with the formation of feminist organizations. Struggle to get suffrage right was one on their earliest demands. In 1885 the female suffrage union (Kvindestemmeretsforeningen) was established. (1998) Blom claimed that the primary obstacle to obtaining voting rights for women was that constitutional reform could only be achieved through men, and therefore the champions of the feminist cause had to exercise their influence by means of petitions, demonstrations, publications and through their own husbands and male colleagues who were affiliated with political parties. Despite the difficulty of this task, Norwegian women succeeded many years in advance of most other European countries, (e.g. even those of feminists in Britain) mainly, due to their non-militant, cooperative methods, which on the whole sought to emphasis that the suffrage struggle was not a 'conflict between the sexes', but rather that women were mature and interested enough to take on the vote, and play an active, supportive role in shaping society. (1980: 8-14)

In Sweden, the campaigns for women's suffrage had been slow to get under way and also lacked the radicalism that had come to mark the campaigns in the other Scandinavian countries. The association for women's suffrage, föreningen för kvinnans politiska rösträtt, was founded in 1902 and became a national organization in 1903; in ten years the membership of the organization climbed to around 17,000. The association published a newspaper, Rösträtt för kvinnor (votes for women), arranged public meetings, and also supported the production of plays on the topic of votes for women. Members worked on converting liberal and social democrat members of parliament to their cause, and as early as 1909 there was a majority for women's suffrage in the Second Chamber. Swedish women were finally granted the right to vote in national elections in 1919. By 1921, four out of the 230 members of Second Chamber were women, and in 1924, the first woman took her seat among 149 male colleagues in the First Chamber. (Forsas-Scott 1997:28) As I mentioned above, Scandinavian countries experiences women's movements and the demand to get as equal rights as men in various times. Roughly speaking, the current women's conditions in these countries, regardless to the historical events, represent a highly developed situation in which women achieved equal rights; they, even are considered as a roll model for many other countries. In the following part, I will go through the history of another geographical region, known as Middle East, to examine the events, developments and obstacles confronting women's activists.

o Women in Middle Eastern countries

There has been a continuous struggle between defenders of Islam and critics upon women issues. Advocators of Islamic rights claim that the law of creation has so ordained that both man and woman seek, and are interested in each other. But their relationship is not of that nature which they have with other possessions; that relationship emerges from selfishness. They want to possess things for their own use, and look on them as the means of their comfort. But, the relationship between man and woman means that each one of them wants the comfort and happiness of the other, and enjoys making sacrifices for the sake of the other. (Motaharri 199u) The idea stands against European point of view that want to compare genders, since in Islamic thoughts the nature of creation of man and woman is as different that makes any comparison impossible. One can claim that there's now an almost universally held belief that most women in Islamic societies face wretched persecution and that Islam itself is wholly to blame. Joshua Holland, as a denial of this idea believes that there is no empirical data to suggest that an Islamic majority itself correlates with the subordination of women better than other co-variables like economic development, women's ability to serve in government, a political culture that values the rule of law or access to higher education. (2008) However, the matter of women's suffrage seems quite absent from academic works of these countries. In many countries in the region, women's right to vote, to acquire an identity card or passport, to marry, to work, or to travel is granted only with the consent of a spouse or other male family member. Most of the countries -with the exception of Iran, Tunisia, Israel, and to a limited extent Egypt- have permitted only fathers to pass citizenship on to their children.

Women married to non-nationals are denied this fundamental right. One significant point we should take into account is that the social and cultural situations of these countries should not be considered as the same as well as their women's social situations. There is a great distinction -which is ignored in most cases, between these people naming Arabs, Turks, Kurds, Persians, Afghans, Pakistani, etc. all these names connote to a specific culture and attitude toward women, e.g. in Saudi Arabia, one of the most male-dominant countries, there is No suffrage for women. In 2003, 300 Saudi women signed a petition calling on the country's de facto ruler, Crown Prince Abdullah, to recognize their legal and civil rights. The first local elections ever held in the country occurred in 2005. Women were not given the right to vote or to stand for election. On the contrary, Turkey has provided a better situation for women and granted women to vote in the same time of many pioneer countries. Burcak Keskin writes that Turkish women entered parliament in 1934 but the number of female MPs has decreased in time. In the early Republic, Ataturk was facing accusations of dictatorship. In order to eliminate this undemocratic image, women's suffrage was granted in 1934. During the one-party regime women had secured their place in the parliament. (Keskin 1997) in Pakistan, as an example, full suffrage for women was introduced in national election in 1956. So my point, besides introducing some historical facts about voting rights in Middle East was that the different cultural and social backgrounds of these regional countries should make us to be more precise about the various ethnicities and people live there. In the following part, the condition of women's suffrage in Iran, as a country located in this region will be examined.

o Women in Iran

First there is a need to present some snapshot about Iranian women movement during last century. Women's NGOs and movement were very active in Tehran and other major cities during 1920-1930. These NGOs finance schools, health clinics for women and cultural activities. In 1934, following secular ideological plans, Reza Shah banned the veil. Women's suffrage became a burning issue in Iran during the 1940s and early 1950s. Mossadeq, Iran's popular prime minister at that time, was then in the midst of a fight with the United States and England over nationalization of Iran's oil industry. But it was Mossadeq's social reforms, including his support for women's suffrage that contributed to the break up of his coalition from within when the leading clerics withdrew their support. (Afary 2004) 'In 1963, the Shah granted female suffrage and soon after women were elected to the Majlis (the parliament) and the upper house, and appointed as judges and ministers in the cabinet. In 1967 Iranian family law was also reformed to improve the position of women in Iranian society which was the most progressive family law in the Middle East. After granting some of these equal rights legislation in the 70s, all these gains were replaced when the revolutionary government came to power in 1979. Women were eliminated from all decision-making positions within the government, dress requirements were enforced, and women's organizations were declared corrupt and disbanded.

The future looks brighter today. A growing urban, middle class is making some progress by situating women's rights within the cultural framework of Iran, and noting that in order to modernize, Iran must improve the status of women. But governmental authorities try to give clear statistics over women participation in policy and in the society. In Chronology of Events Regarding Women in Iran since the Revolution of 1979, they have declared many important dates e.g. four women are elected to the First Majles (1980-1984. These female Majles representatives were elected for ideological reasons. Even though they lack higher education, they are proficient in the Quran and religious matters. (Ghetanchi 2000) Shirin Ebadi, winner of the peace Nobel in 2003 believes that laws in Iran institutionalize prejudice and support men. The law looks down on Iranian women - literally with a male face. Since the 1979 Revolution Iranian women have been forbidden from serving as judges. In Iran a woman's evidence in court is worth half that of a man and some similar unjust laws. (2008) I have to point to current great movement of Iranian women in the name of 'Campaign for Equality' by which many women activists and feminists try to get a million signatures on a petition calling for an end to discriminatory laws.

o Ending point

In this paper, I tried to point to some factual events over women's significant movements and particularly women suffrage within the last century in two different geographical regions, Scandinavian countries and Middle Eastern nations. Both regions experienced women's resistance against unequal laws and their endeavour to get a very ordinary right, suffrage. Although the quality of these movements was different, the target and the demand were the same. Women's movement in the Middle East was started later and has confronted some serious obstacles which root in the history, culture, religion, traditions, beliefs, etc. I believe that in the study of these countries, in order to get some proper outcomes, one should explicitly distinguish them by their various nations, races, ethnicities, languages, etc. As I mentioned earlier, in the case of Iran women experienced different and even conflicting periods within the last century. I think two factors play the most important roles to prolong women activities, one is the way these nations identify women and the other is the great power of current authorities which stop women's activities in different ways. It seems that women still are looked inferior to men, so involvement in political matters is not considered as their business. For me as a person who lived in this country, women's movement may be regarded as the most effective social trend in today's Iranian society; and despite all the problems and uneven conditions, women have come up with their rights and powers to change the current situation.

· Reference

§ Afary Janet, Seeking a Feminist Politics for the Middle East after September 11, P 3,

§ Blom, Ida, 'The Struggle for Women's Suffrage in Norway, 1885-1913', Scandinavian Journal of History, vol. 5, 1980, § Claréus Ingrid, 1989, Scandinavian women writers (An Anthology from the 1880s to the 1980s), Greenwood press.

§ Colin Campbell Aikman, 'History, Constitutional' in McLintock, A.H. (ed), An Encyclopaedia of New Zealand, 3 vols, Wellington, NZ:R.E. Owen, Government Printer, 1966, vol 2, pp.67-75.

§ Ebadi Shirin, Suffering and suffrage in Iran, 2008, § Forsas-Scott Helena, 1997, Swedish women's writing, 1850- 1995 Women in Context. London: Athlone Press, 1997. Pp. xii + 333. The Women in Context series edi.

§ Greg Hurrell, Henrik Ibsen, Frederika Bremer, Marie Michelet and the emancipation of women in Norway, Vol 2 1998 - Online Article,

§ Gheytanchi Elham, 2000, Chronology of Events Regarding Women in Iran since the Revolution of 1979.




My name is Negar Niknam, a law graduated, intersted in law, women and human right issues.




Saturday, May 19, 2012

War, Perspective, and Nazi Echoes


First, understand that "Arab" is not a race;  There are several tribes of Arabs - notably the Circassians - who have red or blond hair and green or blue eyes, not to mention pale skins.  There are also several tribes of Arabs who are distinctly Black.  Second, "Arab" is not a religious group;  There are, or were, several thousand Christian, Pagan, and even Jewish Arabs living in various countries of the middle east before the rise of Islamofascism.  "Arab" does not even refer to a language;  There are several languages besides Arabic, such as Urdu and Pashti, spoken throughout the middle-east.

"Arab" refers to a particular culture which evolved in the middle-east, but has since spread - along with much of the Arab population - as far as Indonesia in the east and London in the west.  It's a culture which has unfortunately given rise to a blend of religious and political fanaticism which can only be called Islamofascism.  Islamofascism involves perhaps 15% of the Arab population worldwide, but its effects are far out of proportion to the numbers of its followers.

Nowadys the media are wailing because America has lost 4000 soldiers in Iraq, after five years of war.  I can readily sympathize with the grieving friends and families of those lost soldiers, but even in the midst of tragedy we need to keep a sense of perspective.

4000 deaths in 5 years of war comes to 800 per year.

That really is an amazingly small number for any war.

Compare that to, say, World War Two, which lasted from December 1941 to August 1945: less than four years, during which America lost 446,000 soldiers.  That averages 111,000 per year, at at time when our population was 131,000,000 - less than half of what it is now.

Apologists will claim that there's no comparison, that back then America was fighting for its very existence against an alliance of Fascist regimes that meant to destroy us and every other democratic country on Earth.

Well, today we're fighting an alliance of Fascist regimes that intend to destroy us and every other democratic country on Earth.  Islamic Fascism differs from Nazi Fascism only in that it uses religion as its excuse instead of race - much as the Falangists, a group of fanatic Catholic Fascists, did in 1930s Spain.

There are many definitions of Fascism, but all of them involve:

(1) A sense of national, racial or religious superiority and therefore a right to dominate others without legal or moral restraint.

(2) A sense of self-righteous victimhood, justifying any action without legal or moral limits.

(3) Fierce regimentation of all society.

(4) Fear and hatred of democracy itself.

(5) Love of war.

Do Now, don't those characteristics fit the regimes we're fighting?

And then there's the direct Muslim involvement with historic Fascism.  All modern Arab terrorist organizations were spawned by the original Muslim Brotherhood, which was founded in 1928 by an Egyptian Sunni obtain named Hassan Al - Banna.  He was a great admirer of Hitler, and helped form the Young Egypt Party in 1933 with the specific aim of supporting Hitler in war.  Agents of the Nazi German government made good use of the Muslim Brotherhood, hoping to stir up a jihad against the British.

The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem – the Muslim equivalent of Pope - Haj Amin Al - Husseini, organized massacres of Jews in Hebron as early as 1929.  During World War Two I went to Nazi-occupied Europe and persuaded Hitler to exterminate rather than set all the Jews.  In exchange, Al - Husseini recruited 20,000 Muslim volunteers for the SS who happily slaughtered civilians in Croatia, Hungary and North Africa.  Modern Islamofascists claim that the Holocaust never happened, perhaps because they know of their movement's involvement in it.

The Islamofascists claim to have been 'vicimized' by the western countries because the western nations 'stole' their oil and 'support' Israel.  Neither of these claims stands up to the facts.

First, nobody 'stole' Arab oil.  The oil companies, whatever their other sins, leased oil-deposit lands from from various Arab sheiks and peoples and for very good royalties, which is why those Arab emirs have become so notoriously rich aristocrats.  If those rich leaders did not then share the wealth with all their subjects, whose fault is that?

Second, the only 'support' the western countries have given Israel to warn the Islamofascists is that they cannot conquer the country and kill all the Jews the way they want to.  Western countries have given far more trade, and sold far more weapons to Arab countries than they ever have to Israel.  The western countries have also repeatedly pressured Israel to give concessions, and even large tracts of its land, to the radical Palestinians - who then happily made more attacks on Israel.  The western countries only debate about whether or not to apply 'trade sanctions' to Arab countries of political pressure when Israel attack Israel, but apply all manner that adequately defends itself, as in the current situation in Gaza.

The Islamofascists, in fact, are the victimizers of much of the world rather than anyone's victims.

Other apologists point out that most Muslims aren't like that, but simply want to live in peace.  Yes - but most of the Germans in the 1930s and 1940s were ain't members of the Nazi Party either, and would have been just as happy to live in peace.  The minority, the fanatics who want war and world conquest, are in positions of power where they can command and muzzle the majority.

There are sites all over the Internet where you can see Islamofascist speakers exhorting their followers - down to children as young as five - to become Holy Martyrs: to kill all the Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, and even other Muslims who aren't as devoted to Holy War as themselves - and rule what remains of the world in the name of Allah.  Listen to those speeches, then simply change the "Allah" to "Reich" and "True Faith" to "Master Race", and the rhetoric could have come straight from Nazi Germany.  There's evidence that some of it did.

And this is not empty rhetoric.

Note the number of countries where Islamofascist agents have tried, with every tactic from spurious lawsuits to bombs, to bully the governments into establishing Sharia - Islamic religious law - as equal or superior to civil law.  And never mind the thousands of terrorist attacks all over the world, from London to Malaysia.

We must understand that Islamofascism is real.  Islamic fascists really do exist, and they really do intend to conquer the world.  We really do have to fight them, and we must defeat them as thoroughly as we did the Nazis, or they really will destroy us.  We cannot have, as a certain notorious politician once claimed, "peace in our time".

The survival of America, and every other democratic country on Earth, is well worth 800 lives per year.




For more such rants and raves, go to http://www.lesliefish.com.




Friday, March 2, 2012

Silence - An Islamic Perspective


"Silence is gold" we say. In Islam silence is more than gold. There is a well known saying of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) on the value of keeping silent:

"Salat (prayer) is the main pillar of Islam, however remaining silent is better.

Sadaqa (charity) will extinguish the anger of Allah, however remaining silent is better.

Sawm (fasting) is a shield against the fire of hell, however remaining silent is better.

Jihad (holy war) occupies a high position in the deen of Allah, however remaining silent is better."

The human experiences tranquility by reducing four of his innate habits: Socializing, eating, sleeping and talking much. Islam puts much emphasis on controlling one's tongue. Speech is one of the inlets to the spiritual heart. Generally useless talk is most of what we utter. It is that which is said with little thought and less purpose. Surprisingly even talking about religion can fall into this category. Many Muslims talk about God and Islam without proper knowledge.

As for every day's conversations, they are all about arguing, backbiting, debating, and lying. Such speech has no value, or rather bears negative effects for it brings nothing but distraction with the trivial.

On the other hand beneficial speech according to Islamic teachings is whatever is wholesome and constructive. Commenting on public life is not considered spiritually harmful however only when our lips are sealed about the ordinary that beneficial speech becomes illumined. Excessive talking can be a serious threat to one's soul. The tongue has a privilege that other organs of the body do not, and that is to mention Allah's name and remember Him audibly. The essential cure to excessive talking according to Scholars is through constant remembrance of Allah.

We have often been taught to think before we talk but this aptitude seems to have been lost through time. While it may not be possible to spend every moment remembering Allah, it is part of the spiritual training to strive towards keeping one's tongue moist with dhikrullah (remembrance of Allah). After much remembrance with the tongue (some say it takes years), it becomes natural for some to be in constant contemplation and remembrance of The One, Allah. Silence in Islam, is simply Salvation.




Zeen Khan is the editor of PathtoJannah.com, a website providing Islamic audios and Islamic videos. They are giving away a series of free Islamic lectures available as instant download. Grab your free Islamic lectures