Saturday, April 12, 2025

 PAKISTAN

Three villagers booked for hunting rare Himalayan grey goral in AJK


ADW: Naemorhedus goral: INFORMATION














Tariq Naqash 
Published April 12, 2025 
DAWN

Police in the Bhimber district of Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) on Saturday booked three villagers for capturing and slaughtering a Himalayan grey goral — a rare and protected species — in a serious violation of the Wildlife Act 2014.

The illegal hunting of protected species of animals is an issue for wildlife conservation efforts. Previously, in January, three people, including two government employees, were arrested for illegally hunting the rare Suleiman Markhor in the mountainous Takato Range in Balochistan.

The first information report (FIR) was lodged at the Choki (Samahni) police station on the complaint of Aamir Rafique, a game watcher, after video clips of the grisly act went viral on social media, confirmed Syeda Shaista Ali, an official at the Wildlife and Fisheries Department in Muzaffarabad.

“Today [Friday] at 11pm, I came across a video on social media showing Sajid Hassan, Muhammad Nawaz, and Muhammad Mushtaq — residents of Bandala Baghcha village — capturing and slaughtering a rare species of deer,” the FIR, registered at 1:20am, quoted Rafique as saying.

“I immediately rushed to the scene along with three colleagues, but the culprits had fled by the time we arrived. I am now filing this formal complaint for legal action against them.”

Shaista Ali said the suspects had been booked under Section 10(2) of the AJK Wildlife Act, 2014, which prohibits the hunting and killing of protected wildlife.

The Himalayan grey goral (Naemorhedus goral bedfordi), a species native to the Himalayan region and found in both Pakistan and India, is listed as “Near Threatened” on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List. Its declining population is largely attributed to habitat destruction, illegal hunting, and competition with livestock.

The two clips shared with Dawn.com show a man in a bright blue shalwar kameez and his companions performing acts of cruelty on the animal as it cries throughout the ordeal.

“This is an inhuman and criminal act that breaks our hearts,” said Shaista. “Such people deserve no leniency, and we are committed to bringing them to justice.”

Earlier in the week, the Punjab Wildlife Department and PSL franchise Lahore Qalandars signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) aimed at bolstering wildlife conservation efforts in the region.

The MoU signing ceremony was graced by the presence of stakeholders, including the cricketers from the franchise, who expressed their commitment to this noble cause. Among them was Sikandar Raza, a renowned Pakistani-Zimbabwean cricketer and the captain of the Zimbabwe national team, who delivered an inspiring speech that resonated with the audience, emphasising the importance of wildlife conservation. The MoU will primarily focus on educational outreach, community engagement and awareness efforts to support wildlife projects.

In June of last year, a wildlife team had also arrested five people involved in illegal hunting and seized four slaughtered chinkara deer, two rifles and a four-by-four vehicle.

ESSAY: BREAKING UP WITH YOUR PHONE

Taha Ali 
Published April 6, 2025
 Dawn, EOS


We seem to be turning a corner in our relationship with smartphones.

When the iPhone first launched in 2007, Steve Jobs described it as a “revolutionary and magical product” and, in those heady early days, it truly seemed the start of a wonderful new age. The smartphone’s impact has been undeniable, transforming our lives, our work, our habits and our society in deep and profound ways.

Now, almost two decades later, a grand reassessment has begun. A mountain of scientific research has amassed on the perils of smartphones. A mini-industry of highly readable and thought-provoking books has emerged in lockstep, with a host of provocative and ominous names — Digital Minimalism, Stolen Focus, Alone Together, The Anxious Generation, 12 Ways Your Phone is Changing You, Wish I Were Here etc.

Smartphones haemorrhage the attention span. Research shows that having one’s phone lying unused on the side or in a pocket or in a bag nearby — its mere presence — significantly impairs one’s concentration. Phone breaks also exact heavy consequences — a study from the University of California Irvine discovered it takes an average of 23 minutes to regain one’s focus for the task at hand.

Our phones have become our constant companions, yet research shows their mere presence drains our focus and fuels addiction…

Research has linked heavy smartphone use to a host of physical conditions, including obesity, ADHD symptoms, lower sperm counts in men and higher risk of breast cancer in women. On the social side, phone usage correlates with significant risk of accidents, dissatisfaction in relationships and political polarisation.

Addiction is a concern. Apple reported in 2016 that iPhone users unlock their phones 80 times a day on average — approximately once every 18 minutes. Another survey found that typical users touch — ie tap, type, swipe etc — their phone over 2,600 times a day.

Then there is hard biological evidence: MRI scans found that heavy smartphone users had reduced grey matter volume and, in common with other addictions, less activity in brain areas correlated with empathy, impulse control, emotion and decision-making.

Smartphone and social media also cause an uptick in stress biomarkers, including the hormone cortisol. The implications are succinctly expressed in the title of a New York Times story on this finding: ‘Putting down your phone may help you live longer.’

While smartphone addiction is not yet formally recognised as a mental disorder, the research is certainly piling up. It fits in with the operational definition of technology addiction, ie “non-chemical, behavioural addictions which involve human-machine interactions” — alongside addiction to the Internet, social media and video games. The term nomophobia — ‘no mobile phone phobia’ — has entered the lexicon, the irrational fear of being without one’s phone or being unable to use it for some reason.

A self-diagnostic ‘smartphone addiction scale’ developed by Korean researchers in 2013 is hugely influential and continues to rack up hundreds of research citations every year.

These concerns are real enough to start driving policy: a town in Finland made headlines last year when it announced schools were shunning screens and reverting to paper. Another proposal in Finland to ban mobile devices in schools has garnered strong parliamentary support and is expected to go live in August.

Most of us, though, will rarely get this luxury. “We don’t have a choice on whether we use smartphones,” writes journalist Catherine Price, author of How to Break Up With Your Phone. “The choice is how we use them.” And this is where things get complex: how does one find a healthy balance with a technology that is literally designed to be addictive?

There is no standard recipe. There seem to be three main types of interventions, each progressively more intense.

THE LONG, ARDUOUS ROAD TO RECOVERY

First up is nudges, quick fixes, hacks, and small habits which pack a punch.

The first obvious step, of course, is to turn off non-essential notifications on the phone. Multiple studies report that notifications increase distraction, stress, annoyance and frustration. A study from Duke University finds that batching notifications to three times a day reduces stress and increases well-being.

This is easy enough to do. Android phones now come with digital well-being controls. For those who prefer a more proactive approach, there are a wealth of apps which enable users to set time limits and restrictions on specific apps.

I’ve personally found an unorthodox approach very helpful: turning the phone display to grayscale — research indicates that absence of bright and saturated colours makes screens “less gratifying” and helps control usage. There are tons of websites, video explainers and books devoted to the ‘digital detox’ trend, how to take intentional breaks from smartphones and screens.

Engaging real-world activities also help substitute for smartphone time — socialising, hobbies or even simple things such as reading a newspaper or picking up a book. Adult colouring books are hugely popular in the West because they are a good way to relax and cultivate a meditation-like state.

If these tricks don’t work, we have the second strategy: rituals, discipline, and significant lifestyle interventions.

Some people ditch smartphones entirely. ‘People want ‘dumbphones’. Will companies make them?’ reads a BBC headline from last year. The answer is a resounding yes. Dumbphone sales in the US were forecast to reach 2.8 million units in 2023, amounting to a small but significant two percent of overall phone sales. Nokia rebooted its classic 3210 brand a few years ago to a strong response.

Nature is another ally. A Danish study indicates that time spent in green spaces — long immersive sessions with nature — can have a restorative effect and reduce smartphone use. Unfortunately, the design of Pakistani cities does not prioritise nature. Here, it might help to experiment with hands-on activities such as gardening or cooking or art as a creative and fulfilling substitute for phone time.

The third intervention is the most important and profound. We dip into the metaphysical dimension. Could it be that our smartphone compulsion reflects a deeper psychological or spiritual malaise? To quote author Nir Eyal, in his book Indistractable: How to Control Your Attention and Choose Your Life: “Most people don’t want to acknowledge the uncomfortable truth that distraction is always an unhealthy escape from reality.”

Perhaps we have given up on real life, on changing the big things — we are just passing time now, coasting along, one distraction to the next.

Eyal suggests that the big question we should be asking ourselves perhaps is not what we are being distracted by — but rather, what are we being distracted from? In other words, are we doing important things in life? Things we truly believe in? Does our work matter in the grand scheme of things? If so, perhaps we would not be so easily distracted.

This feeds into a larger critique of modern life, undertaken by luminaries ranging from GK Chesterton to George Orwell, Marshall McLuhan and Neil Postman. Modern society is synonymous with hyper stimulation — from junk food to video-on-demand, reality TV and social media — reminiscent of the “bread and circuses” formula that Aldous Huxley wrote about in his famous dystopian vision, Brave New World.

Modern jobs are no longer seen as vocations or callings, where one can pour in one’s heart and soul. Company culture is rarely geared towards community. The concept of quiet quitting — mentally checking out of one’s job and doing just the bare minimum at work — is a mainstream phenomenon now.

Without a distinct sense of personal identity, a clear personal mission, perhaps one subconsciously seeks out the siren song of infinite distraction. And the phone provides it in spades.

And, perhaps, this is the real tragedy here. We seem to have disengaged from disinterested virtue, from transcendental ideals. We are strangers to nature. We no longer choose to dip into the deep waters that give us great art, literature and music. Younger generations perhaps have little idea that this dimension even exists. These pursuits are hard but they are infinitely more rewarding than anything our phones can give us.

“The earth has its music for those who will listen,” wrote famous philosopher and poet George Santayana.

But only if we put our phones aside.

The writer teaches at the NUST School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Islamabad.

He can be reached at taha.ali@gmail.com


Published in Dawn, EOS, April 6th, 2025
Mineral bounties


Aasim Sajjad Akhtar 
Published April 11, 2025
DAWN


THERE is a new(ish) game in town and it is called the scramble for ‘critical’ minerals. In a world dominated by microchips and digital gadgets, and in which capitalism is greening itself through the so-called energy transition, minerals like lithium, silicon and gallium are more coveted than ever. The desire to control critical minerals is increasingly at the heart of geopolitical conflict.

In large parts of the post-colonial world, natural resource endowment has been a curse for local populations rather than a blessing. Most of sub-Saharan Africa has been pillaged for its resources, while in Pakistan, Reko Diq and Saindak offer examples of how rich-resource regions and local populations never benefit from mineral riches. As per the evolving geostrategic logics of the global order, our militarised ruling class is priming itself to preside over a new round of mineral extraction in peripheries like Balochistan, KP and Gilgit-Baltistan.

While hosting a galaxy of global investors at a high-profile conference in Islamabad earlier this week, the prime minister insisted that critical mineral exploration offered Pakistan a shortcut out of its perennial debt trap. In parallel, the new US secretary of state Mark Rubio emphasised in a phone call to his Pakistani counterpart Ishaq Dar that Pak-US relations could improve if Islamabad grants Washington access to Pakistan’s deposits of critical minerals.

While officialdom here never needs legal cover for resource grabs at the behest of imperialism, it is worth noting that amendments to the KP Mines and Materials Act have rather suddenly been proposed in a hush-hush manner to pave the way for a ‘development’ miracle that suits global capital and local contractors alike.


Natural resource endowment has been a curse for local people.

For context, in 2023 the US Department of Energy published a Critical Minerals list, including the ‘electric 18’ minerals that Washington believes will be at the heart of the struggle for control over the global economy in decades to come. While the entire world is up in arms about the Trump administration’s tariff wars, especially against China, bear in mind that Joe Biden had already launched a chip war against China in 2022. Washington imposed stringent limits on the exports of any material to China, including silicon, used in the design and production of chips, which today are the essential intermediate goods in virtually all everyday consumption items, including mobile phones and cars.

Crucially, AI and advanced weapons systems are also reliant on cutting-edge chip technology — and the reaction of Big Tech and Western governments to the emergence of China’s DeepSeek confirms the high-stakes nature of technology wars today and in our putatively collective future.

Then there is the massive growth of industries like electric cars, as well as renewable energy sources in general, particularly solar. This translates into a huge demand for batteries, solar panels and other related implements, requiring huge quantities of critical minerals.

It is in this context that Pakistan’s current rulers are hedging its bets on a new wave of resource grabs; whereas until recently our fossil fuel-dominated economy revolved around oil, gas and coal, today it is all about critical minerals. Pakistan has never had huge deposits of oil and gas, but the establishment and its lackeys have always generated rents by playing off Pakistan’s geostrategic location.

This has not changed; the Gulf kingdoms, China and the US continue to grapple for influence within our ruling class. What has changed — or at least this is what the current regime believes — is that Pakistan now has significant enough deposits of critical minerals to be a big economic player in its own right.

But this would require Pakistan to have a strategy to use its minerals to industrialise, rather than just sell them off to the highest bidder. It is also telling that mineral extraction is hardly beneficial for local ecologies, no matter how one pitches the energy transition. But then again, Pakistan’s rulers have never been shy to trade in contradictions — as the ‘Green Pakistan’ corporate farming initiative, which is premised on more canal-building on the Indus river, confirms.

And then of course there is the question of what the critical minerals game will mean for the Baloch and other peoples who have only ever suffered brutalisation due to the geopolitical struggles that have played out on their lands. Beyond Balochistan, the current wave of violence in KP and the increasingly brazen ecocide in the mountainous highlands of GB have a lot to do with the race for critical minerals.

Bounty hunters are at it again. And the people whose rights and resources everyone is after are still proverbial sacrificial lambs.

The writer teaches at Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad

Published in Dawn, April 11th, 2025
Geopolitics of dams


Khurram Abbas 
Published April 10, 2025
DAWN




RECENTLY China has announced construction of the world’s largest dam on the Yarlung Tsangpo River in Tibet. India has criticised Beijing’s initiative due to potential downstream impacts. This isn’t the only dam in the region facing opposition from a lower riparian state.

India is advancing several large-scale hydropower projects, such as Tipaimukh dam on the Barak River, which is opposed by Bangladesh. Ratle, Pakal Dul, Kishanganga, Salma dam (also known as Afghanistan-India Friendship dam), Shahtoot dam and Kamal Khan dam have also raised serious concerns of lower riparian states, ie Pakistan and Iran.

As per international law, states can construct dams within their defined territories to utilise water for various purposes. Construction of dams is an internal matter of states to support economic development because they provide a reliable source of hydroelectric power, which is a renewable and cost-effective energy alternative, crucial for powering industries and households.

However, in this part of the world, construction of dams is a major source of tensions between upper and lower riparian states. Due to several reasons, construction of dams is not viewed as a positive development; rather, lower riparian states question ‘geopolitical motives’ behind construction of dams by upper riparian states.

First, the historic baggage of armed clashes and unresolved boundary disputes have plagued bilateral relationships. In case of Sino-India relations, strategic competition and border dispute have added fuel to the fire. Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran have similar border-related disputes and a history of troubled relations, which adds mistrust with regard to the respective upper riparian state’s intentions.

Pakistan is reluctant to engage India for revision of the IWT.

For instance, Bangladesh and Pakistan do not view floods as the result of their weak water infrastructure; rather, both countries often blame India for flooding. Afghanistan, Iran, and Pakistan face growing concerns over water scarcity, worsened by climate change, frequent droughts, and rising populations, which have reduced water availability for lower riparian states.

Second, the absence of a comprehensive water-sharing agreement between upper and lower riparian states is one of the major reasons for the construction of these dams. This also allows upper riparian states more freedom to take unilateral actions without consulting lower riparian states. Further, technological advancements and abundant economic resources have increased the ability of upper riparian states to construct big dams to control water flows. This is why upper riparian states reject calls to modify their projects to address concerns of lower riparian states.

Third, the changing world order and weakening of existing international norms has also ramped up the confidence of upper riparian countries. Upper riparian states view this evolving world order as an opportunity for maximisation of their interests with least accountability at global institutions. Thus, threats or attempts to restrict water flow to lower riparian countries have become a norm in international relations. This trend could be viewed in the Middle East, North Africa and South Asia.

The Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) is the only beacon of hope that has managed water-sharing issues between Pakistan and India since 1960. Yet this treaty too is currently under significant duress. With India sending two formal notices to Pakistan (in January 2023 and September 2024) seeking modifications to the treaty, coupled with aggressive statements from Indian leadership such as “blood and water cannot flow together,” concerns have been expressed by Islam­abad that India mi­­­ght attempt to take ‘unilateral’ steps or may divert water flow from the western rivers allocated to Pakistan.

Climate change and growing water scarcity are two primary factors that necessitate revision of the treaty. However, Islamabad is reluctant to engage with New Delhi for revision of the agreement. Political instability, economic turmoil, weak water management of existing resources and lack of expertise in water-related diplomacy are key drivers of Pakistan’s reluctance to engage with India for revision of the IWT.

On the contrary, New Delhi today is politically confident, economically stable, and diplomatically assertive as compared to 1960. Hence, Islamabad does not view it as the right time to renegotiate the treaty. Resultantly, Pakistan’s reluctance and India’s push to revise the treaty have put the IWT’s future in doubt.

Recent trends suggest that dams with geopolitical motives will further mar bilateral relationships between upper and lower riparian states. The 2023 Iran-Afghanistan clash, which killed one Taliban fighter and two Iranian guards, shows water disputes can lead to border conflicts, if left unresolved.

The writer is director of the India Study Centre at ISSI.

Published in Dawn, April 10th, 2025
Spiritual democracy
Published April 11, 2025
DAWN



WITH the political moral vision of the Quran, Islam defeated the corrupt socioeconomic structures of the world and linked human egalitarianism and monotheism. This was the fulfilment of the primordial covenant, which at the time of creation man struck with God. Islam ethically oriented the world and brought forth a unique civilisation. However, later the trichotomy of dictatorship, mysticism and orthodoxy placed obstacles in the path while speculative thought, mystic deliriums and political cynicism of the mediaeval era further prevented progress. During the mediaeval era, the world of Islam was standing at a critical juncture when the imperial West took it by surprise.

Islam’s encounter with the imperial West set in motion the ‘dark age’ of Muslim history, ie the age of surrender and collaboration; since then, Islam is being viewed as per the standards of Western modernity, with secularism and nationalism being the linchpin of all interpretive endeavours. The saner voices of genuine Muslim modernists, who deem nationalism a cannibalistic ideology and secularism to be the bane of modernity, a threat to modern civilisation, have been lost in the cacophony of secular Muslim modernists who happen to be at the helm.

The Orientalists divide Islam into two separate phases: the Makkah and Madinah ‘periods’. They viewed Islam through the lens of the Christian tradition’s ‘render to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s’. This initially led to the dichotomy of the sacred and the profane, while the violent Protestant movement culminated in the Peace of Westphalia (1648) which alienated religion from the state’s affairs. Hence, the West and its Muslim cliques leave no stone unturned to establish that the Holy Prophet (PBUH), when he acted as a lawgiver or political leader, acted ‘secularly’.

In fact, Abrahamic monotheism, outgrowing racial and territorial elements, was at the cusp of launching its ‘world career’ when Islam appeared in Arabia. Hence, monotheism encapsulated in socioeconomic justice was a panacea to the twin malaises, ie socioeconomic disequilibrium and polytheism of the Prophet’s immediate society and the world around. So he himself and his opponents from the very outset knew well that the scale of social reforms this monotheism needed would require his assumption of political power. Thus, what transpired at Madinah was very much linked to the revelations in the cave of Hira.

Monotheism was a panacea to twin malaises.

The Prophet was asked to approach his tribe, then all Arabs in ethnic terms, and mankind at large in human terms. There is nothing ‘national’ about this. Ibn Khaldun and Shah Waliullah concur that Arab conditioning was absolutely necessary if Islam was to develop as an effective religion in the world.

At Madinah, Muslims were constituted as a median community against the rigid formalism of Judaism and the liquidity of Christianity: the ‘best ever’ produced for mankind, balancing out their extremes to fulfil the task of an egalitarian moral order with the instrument of jihad. Internally, the community was relentlessly egalitarian and open with its conduct based on active goodwill and cooperation, with no toleration for distinction between one believer and another, male and female in their equal participation in tasks and functions. In perfect harmony to this vision, the Quran laid out the principle of shura, ie mutual advice through mutual discussion on an absolutely equal footing, to conduct the affairs of the community.

After the Prophet, the principle of shura was observed to elect his first successor. Then it was run on an ‘ad-hoc’ basis, with only great companions consulted on military problems. Fol­low­ing this developed the doctrine of the ‘people of the loosening and the bin­ding’, with influential men selected for shura, which, with the onset of dictatorships in the Islamic world later in history, turned into cliques supporting the regime and shura failed to develop into an institution. Thus the religous doctrine of ‘joint rule’ gave way to political cynicism, which alienated the masses from the political process.

So, amidst colonialism when Jamal al-Din Afghani and Namik Kamal suggested democratic set-ups as a bulwark against Western imperialism, it was not conformism to Western modernity but rather judging their own tradition by the normativity of the Quran.

Iqbal was a democrat in impulse and thought; he attacked Western democracy for its secular orientation rather than its form and process. Pakistan was achieved to fulfil Iqbal’s vision of spiritual democracy, but it adopted Western secular democracy.

If we do not orient ourselves to the political moral vision of the Quran which Iqbal suggested and Jinnah pursued, we are bound to serve others at our own peril, unable to materialise our own destiny.

The writer is an academic.

Published in Dawn, April 11th, 2025
PAKISTAN

Action taken against journalist under Peca for ‘provocative’ social media post


Imtiaz Ali 
Published April 12, 2025 
DAWN


Journalist Junaid Sagar Qureshi was booked on Saturday under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA) 2016 over a ‘provocative and false’ video statement, according to police a spokesperson.

The complainant, ASI Tariq Mumtaz saw the video on WhatsApp, as per the police.

In the video statement, Junaid Sagar allegedly claimed that a dumper ran over a woman in the jurisdiction of Sir Syed police station as a result of which the public became enraged and attacked the police with stones. He further maintained that a station house officer along with two other policemen were injured during the incident, according to the first information report (FIR)

According to the statement, it was found upon verification that no such incident involving the police was reported and the news of a woman being run over was found to be false as well.

It continued that the journalist was spreading provocative and false information and an FIR was registered against him under Section 21 of PECA (2016).

PECA, since its introduction in 2016, has been widely criticised as a “black law” created mainly to punish dissent. In the eight years since its enactment, it has been used extensively against politicians, journalists, rights activists, and even ordinary political workers.

The National Assembly in January passed a controversial amendment bill to the country’s cybercrime laws amid a walkout by PTI lawmakers and journalists from the proceedings.

Qureshi has become the latest journalist to face Peca charges. On March 20, journalist Farhan Mallick, the founder of media agency Raftar and a former news director at Samaa TV, was arrested in a case pertaining to running allegedly “anti-state” content on his outlet’s YouTube channel. He was booked booked under Peca as well as the Pakistan Penal Code.

A few days later, journalist Waheed Murad, who works with Urdu News, was produced before an Islamabad court by the Federal Investigation Agency, which had booked him under Sections 9 (glorification of an offence), 10 (cyber-terrorism), 20 (malicious code) and 26A (punishment for false and fake information) of the Peca.

Earlier this month, a police officer was arrested in Karachi under Peca for using “derogatory remarks” against President Asif Ali Zardari.
Pak pro Palestine Peaceful protest

Editorial 
Published April 12, 2025 
DAWN

A CONCLAVE of local divines that had gathered in Islamabad on Thursday have made two important points: firstly, that all protests and boycotts in support of the besieged Palestinians should remain peaceful, and secondly, that the Muslim world should take collective action to stop the genocide in Gaza. Mufti Taqi Usmani observed that “do protest and boycott, but peacefully”. 

This message is important because over the past few days, mobs have attacked several Western fast-food outlets in Lahore as well as Karachi and other Sindh towns, apparently due to the perception that these brands ‘support’ Israel. However, vandalism is not the way to express solidarity with Palestine. It is a fact that many MNCs — including Big Tech firms — have financially and otherwise supported Israel. But violent attacks on foreign brands in Pakistan will hardly end the genocide. Instead, a more intelligent way for those looking to stand with Palestine would be to follow the guidelines of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement. Rather than randomly boycotting firms believed to be aiding Israel, BDS targets those companies with “a record of complicity in Israeli apartheid”. This can include firms involved in illegal Israeli settlements, or those that have made donations to Tel Aviv’s military. The boycott of apartheid South Africa worked, and conscientious people worldwide should also shun Israel and its allies until the genocide in the occupied territories is permanently halted.

As for the other point made by the clerics, sadly, the Muslim world has done very little of substance to stop the massacre in Gaza, allowing Israel to ramp up its campaign of extermination in the Strip, and also attacking Syria and Lebanon. Calls for unity are important, but the Muslim world is characterised by intense internal division, and the lack of a cohesive policy to stop the war on the Palestinian people. The sad fact is that Muslim-majority countries have been unable to leverage their collective economic and political clout. Other than making sympathetic statements, the OIC has not been able to enforce a trade blockade against Israel, while Muslim states that have diplomatic relations with Tel Aviv have not felt it necessary to break off ties until the bloodshed in Gaza stops. Israel knows how weak and divided the Muslim world is, hence it sees no reason to stop the murder.

Published in Dawn, April 12th, 2025
Stranded Afghans
Published April 12, 2025
DAWN

WESTERN countries have been quite cruel to the Afghan people. Not only did they lay waste to the latter’s homeland over a war that ultimately went nowhere, but they are also failing to take responsibility for the lives they placed at risk during the process of attempting to ‘rebuild’ Afghanistan.

This, of course, is a reference to the many Afghans awaiting their promised repatriation to various Western countries. They have been stranded for years in Pakistan because states that once promised them asylum in recognition of their sacrifices and contributions have been taking their sweet time processing their visa applications.

These refugees face certain risks to their lives and liberty if they return to Afghanistan: their past work for various Western governments and organisations has seen them branded as ‘traitors’ in their country. Those risks have increased considerably of late, as Pakistan has adopted a ‘no concessions’ policy towards Afghan nationals.

It is deeply disappointing that the countries responsible for these refugees’ plight have not shown more urgency in addressing their condition. One wonders if there is any concern about the message being sent by their complacency. They seem to be telling the Afghan people that, no matter where they stood during the so-called war on terror, they were, ultimately, dispensable to Western nations.

One wonders what the Afghans make of their situation: after all, the forces that went into Afghanistan presented themselves as more ‘moral’, more ‘civilised’ and more concerned with ‘human rights’ than the ‘barbarians’ they meant to defeat. Once their long campaign fizzled out though, it seemed only those Afghans who had kept their distance, or those who sided with the ‘enemy’, were the ones who came out on top. The rest had to flee for their lives and seek the charity of other nations.

The countries who pledged their support to them must do better. Pakistan has already made it clear that it is no longer hospitable to Afghan nationals. Though Islamabad must show more flexibility towards refugees who face risks to life and liberty in case of deportation, the other nations responsible for their well-being should also be pushed to step up and expedite their repatriation.

The Afghan people cannot be treated like a football that is kicked around while nations bicker over visa protocols and policies. They deserve safety, stability and a chance to rebuild their lives.

It is both unfair and dangerous that the Afghan people’s immediate well-being has been left entirely to Pakistan to consider, while other nations have been taking years figuring out whether or not they will do right by those whom they promised safety and security. Whatever their concerns, they can be addressed once these refugees are relocated to less hostile locations.

Published in Dawn, April 12th, 2025

 

UK 

Why you are needed at USAF Lakenheath from 14th to 26th April

April 6, 2025

Angie Zelter explains why we must protest at the largest US airbase in Europe.

The UK is unique in that its nuclear program is completely intertwined with that of the US. The UK’s warhead designs are closely tied to their US counterparts and the UK shares the Trident missiles from the US Navy pool. The UK’s nuclear deterrent relies so heavily on American nuclear infrastructure, that it cannot honestly be seen as ‘independent’, even though the UK can launch weapons independently.

This nuclear relationship with the US is governed by the US-UK Mutual Defence Agreement, which was controversially amended in September 2024 so it no longer requires renewal every ten years. The Agreement enables the transfer of nuclear materials, research, training, and technology, between the two countries, contravening the UK’s legal obligation to disarm, and enabling the US to exercise significant leverageover the UK’s foreign and defence policy.

On top of our UK nuclear weapons, we now have changes in the status of USnuclear weapons here.  Although the US withdrew the last of its nuclear weapons from RAF Lakenheath prior to 2008, partly due to sustained civil resistance by peace groups, we now know that they are coming back to the UK.

The 495th Fighter Squadron of the 48th Fighter Wing at Lakenheath became the first squa­dron in Europe equipped with the new nuclear-capable F-35A Lightning II, certified to carry the new B61–12 nuclear gravity bomb. And recent satellite images indicate that 22 of the nuclear shelters, or vaults, at Lakenheath are being reactivated to receive these bombs. Announcements also tell us that the F-35A fighter jet maintenance and repair facilities at the base have now been completed. Recent announcements of full forward deployment means the nuclear bombs are now likely to have already been delivered. So we know definitely that Lakenheath will be central to NATO nuclear escalation.

The peace movement has not been idle. The direct action campaign, the Lakenheath Alliance for Peace (LAP), was formed early in 2024 and is now composed of 59 different peace, justice and environment organisations. We are all joining together because militarisation and nuclear weapons are a major cause of climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution. We are showing resistance and public abhorrence at the nuclear escalation and the forever wars that are bringing death and destruction, environmental degradation and impoverishment to countless millions across the planet.

‘RAF’ Lakenheath is in reality USAF Lakenheath and is the largest US airbase in Europe. It is assigned to United States Air Forces in Europe and Africa. Its Air Force units maintain combat-ready wings that are pledged to NATO, which plans, conducts, coordinates and supports air and space operations in Europe, parts of Asia and all of Africa with the exception of Egypt.

Over the past two decades, warplanes based at USAF Lakenheath have led devastating conventional missions in Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, Serbia, Libya, Syria, the Middle East and East Africa.

USAF Lakenheath is a threat to us all. But with nuclear weapons coming back, under the control of President Trump, it becomes even more dangerous.

The return of US nuclear weapons to Britain, represents a major provocation at a time of escalating tensions between NATO and Russia, and in the world more generally.

Additionally, Lakenheath has been involved in supporting Israel, making us complicit in war crimes and genocide. After the Hamas attacks on 7th October 2023, F-15Es from Lakenheath landed at Muwaffaq Salti Air Base, a major US base in Jordan, on 13th October to bolster the US presence in the region. Since then it has provided ongoing support to Israel in its military attacks on Lebanon, Syria and Yemen.

It is insane to be bringing US nuclear weapons back into the UK and continuing to be a member of the nuclear NATO alliance when every nation in the world should be cooperating to stop runaway climate change and its consequences which threaten all life on this planet. This is why the Lakenheath Alliance is committed to nonviolent direct action for a peaceful and non-threatening world and needs your support.

An International Peace Camp is setting up from 14th to 26th April. We will maintain a night and day vigil at the gates over the full two weeks. We are joining forces with climate, justice and biodiversity movements, with different event days planned throughout the two weeks, focusing on particular issues. There will be an International Peace Conference on Thursday 24th April, entitled Analysing and Resisting US Nuclear Expansion And we will end with a big blockade of the base on Saturday 26th April. We will be joined by internationals experiencing similar problems to us.

For the full programme, please visit our website. And please come and support us and stay for however long you are able. If you cannot make any other day, at least join in the Blockade on 26th April.

Angie Zelter is a long-time peace and environmental campaigner and founder of civil resistance campaigns including Trident Ploughshares, XR Peace, IWPS-Palestine. She is the author of Activism for Life, amongst other books published by Luath Press.


A major contribution to the anti-racist struggle



Sue Lukes reviews Off-White: The Truth About Antisemitism, by Rachel Shabi, published by Oneworld Publications.

As I started to write this, the regular march for Palestine was barred from going past the BBC allegedly because it was on a Saturday and there are synagogues nearby.  Joseph Finlay disentangles a range of themes from that in his excellent Torat Albion post, calling out both the spurious claims of risks to Jews and the thoughtless adaptation to hegemonic “cultural Christianity” involved in insisting on Saturday marches.  And it illustrates all too well why Rachel Shabi’s Off-White should be widely read and discussed on the British left. 

We have seen Rachel defending Jeremy Corbyn when few other journalists did, as one of the few left progressive journalists commenting in print and broadcast media, and as a clear and principled voice on Israel/ Palestine. Off-White is meticulously researched, thoughtful and well written, ranges across history, and situates antisemitism within a thorough understanding of “race”, the “bullshit science” associated with it and racism. It seeks to show us how we got into this mess, in which people who should know better speak and write as though racism is a zero-sum (On this, she quotes Alana Lentin and points out that, unfortunately, there is plenty to go round), in which antisemitism has become a tripwire over which the left stumbles, and so a wedge issue to divide the progressive left.

This is not a new problem: antisemitism gave us the first racist UK immigration law, the Aliens Act 1905, and we should not shy away from or be surprised by the fact that the then editor of the Clarion, a socialist newspaper, echoed politicians of the far right in describing the east end of London as a “foreign country” because of the Jewish settlement there.  Jews were the aliens the Act sought to exclude.   And its not an old problem either.  As I finished writing this, an old acquaintance  posted on Facebook about how “Momentum colluded with the Zionist Labour puppet-masters”.

In between, Rachel did the excellent podcast discussing the book with Bryn Griffiths, in which she pointed out how we in the UK need to learn more about racism, and, as she says, the book gives us the origin story of antisemitism and how it relates to other forms of racism.  There, she explains the importance of England in this history, how purity rules and expulsions directed against “Muslims, Jews, heretics and witches” introduced racism and sexism to the New World, how Jews are characterised as Asiatic, oriental, scheming, rootless, parasitic, disloyal and greedy, but also white-passing and so hiding, and somehow  responsible for both capitalism and socialism.

And now, of course, performative anti-antisemitism creates even more absurdities.  As Shabi says in the podcast, it seems you can be as antisemitic as you like as long as you champion Israel.  In the book she cites the “apex” as Rudy Giuliani saying about George Soros (the billionaire philanthropist known for funding human rights defenders, “a walking antisemitism bingo card”): “He’s not really Jewish, I am more Jewish than he is.” All this, while holocaust revisionism is regularly aired, and people dispute whether Trump supporters are giving Nazi salutes. 

There are real insights scattered generously throughout the book. She has lucid explanations of how Jews are racialised “to be scapegoats”, while Blacks are racialised to be slaves or servants, and so Jews may be conditionally white, but “everything was just fine right up until the moment it suddenly was not”, “things can turn any time”, Jews have no “secure or stable attachment to privilege”. And the other face of that: Dubois looking at the Warsaw ghetto, saying race is “not solely a matter of colour… hard thing for me to learn.”

She is particularly good on the regular invocations of “Judaeo-Christian heritage”.  Her Iraqi heritage fuels her appreciation of a much more authentic and longstanding Judeo-Islamic tradition, not just that of Al-Andalus.  She enjoys the bewilderment of journalists who go to Israel to find most people there do not look like Barbra Streisand, but focuses on the real point: Christians have been trying to kill us for centuries, so stop pretending Judaeo-Christianity is a thing: if you mean “not Muslim” just say it. 

Alongside this, she also provides an expert guide to Christian Zionism, that poisonous mix of Islamophobia, end-times craziness, vicious settler support and huge political influence that vastly outnumbers and outpowers Jewish Zionism, while entirely instrumentalising Jews and frequently characterising them as arrogant, stupid or destined for hell. 

There is so much insight and information in the book, I am cursing the absence of an index.  And I have some quibbles. She slides too easily over questions of class, and I would have appreciated maybe a little more on the role of Jews in building trade unions and other class movements in the UK and elsewhere – surely one of the reasons Henry Ford paid to print copies of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion?  She is eloquent about Jews in the US civil rights movement and quotes one interviewee’s perception that by positioning ourselves solely as allies we erased the ways white supremacy targets us as Jews.  But some of the feelings of “not belonging”, she describes British and US Jews as having are also those described by most migrants and their children, and surely must be products of xenophobia as well as antisemitism? 

But nowhere does she pretend it is easy or simple. And she shines in the here and now. “A situation that sees one relatively secure minority express fears of having to pack their bags while at exactly the same moment a structurally vulnerable minority really is forced to pack up and leave feels almost impossible to address within one progressive camp” (the former referring to media reports of some Jewish feelings during the Corbyn years, the latter to the over 160 people deported or detained as part of the ‘Windrush scandal’). But address it she does, acknowledging that “we need time and space and generosity to talk about different types of racism.”

She expertly fillets some flashpoints: the problems over the Women’s March in the US, the contrast between memorials to slavery and the Holocaust, the difficulties of fighting antisemitism when that is seen as “congruent with supporting an illiberal and racist state” but also the descriptions of Israel as evil or diseased, rather than simply holding it to account as a country that describes itself as a democracy.  How to respond to the way that a “country that invented… repulsive anti-Jewish laws now projected its past onto Palestinian campaigners.. .trying to get Israel to conform to international law.”

So Off-White is a tremendous contribution to our anti-racist struggles and our understanding: of our histories, of why it all feels so complex and messy and maybe some ways out of it all.  As Rachel Shabi says: “It’s not as if our current approach is creating informed and resilient coalitions.”  So, “we need to show up as white and non-white and hold that contradiction and create cognitive, political and emotional space for it.”

Sue Lukes was an Islington Labour Councillor from 2018 to 2022 and is a writer and consultant on migration issues.