Friday, March 29, 2024
12:13 PM (GMT +5)

Go Back   CSS Forums > CSS Compulsory Subjects > Current Affairs > Current Affairs Notes

Reply Share Thread: Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook     Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter     Submit Thread to Google+ Google+    
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old Thursday, August 25, 2005
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Lahore.
Posts: 2
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
strivingtothebetter is on a distinguished road
Default Musharraf to Address Jewish Congress in Historic September Event

WASHINGTON, August 25: General Pervez Musharraf will become the first Pakistani leader to address the American Jewish Congress at a historic event in New York on September 17, which the Congress has announced “may mark a turning point in the relations between our peoples.”

Musharraf’s address would coincide with his visit to New York for the UN Summit which begins on Sept 14.

“I am pleased to announce that President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan has accepted an invitation I extended to him last May in his Islamabad office to address the most pressing global problem – the need for Moslems to embrace modernity with openness and tolerance,” the Chairman of the American Jewish Congress-Council for World Jewry, Jack Rosen, said in a Memo circulated to the top leaders of the Jewish community.

The Memo also disclosed that Musharraf had indicated that he had tested the domestic Pakistani waters over the Israel issue, and felt that diplomatic ties could only follow an Israeli-Palestinian agreement.

Rosen gave details of how this invitation was accepted by Musharraf and disclosed that before requesting Musharraf to speak to the Jewish community, he even consulted President Bush at his Texas ranch, who gave his approval.

But the process started when Musharraf himself invited the Jewish leaders to Islamabad, Rosen’s Memo revealed.

“At President Musharraf's invitation, I went to Islamabad last May with AJCongress-Council for World Jewry Vice Chairman Phil Baum and Director David Twersky. During our discussions, which addressed the Israeli-Palestinian situation, terrorism, and relations between the Islamic world and the West, we proposed that he publicly address a broad sector of the American Jewish community in New York. I am pleased to announce that President Musharraf has accepted our invitation.”

Rosen’s Memo said: “Given the sensitivities involved, we chose to first consult with officials in the White House and State Department and with senior officials in Jerusalem. Several weeks ago, I spoke with President Bush about it at his ranch in Crawford, Texas.”

“President Bush said he saw it as an important opportunity and understood the significance of this step by President Musharraf. President Bush was enthusiastic about the opportunity that was presented and expressed support for our efforts. I suggested he send a high level representative and he made an initial suggestion and said he would consider who he might send.”

Rosen said: “Since it inception, AJCongress-Council for World Jewry, working with Jewish communities around the world, has set before it the task of building bridges to the Moslem world by pursuing contacts with authoritative Moslem political and religious figures in America and around the world.

“We have approached this mission with sobriety and a hard headedness about the Jewish cause, about current conflicts and impending threats. But we have also been informed by the compelling and urgent necessity to look for significant figures in the Moslem world who, by meeting us at least halfway, would help accelerate the process by which the Moslem world finds its way into a healthy and productive relationship with modernity.”

Rosen revealed that the years of contacts and meetings have now begun to bear fruit. “President Musharraf has repeatedly spoken out against extremism in the Moslem world. His doctrine of "Enlightened Moderation" encourages Moslems to embrace pluralism, openness, and tolerance. This will be the first public meeting between President Musharraf and representatives of the Jewish community. It is a departure which may mark a turning point in the relations between our peoples.

His Memo said: “I need not underscore President Musharraf's crucial role in world affairs, especially at this moment in history. He is a key ally on the war against Islamic terrorism, and leads a large Moslem country that is the only Moslem nation with nuclear weapons. It is hard to overestimate his significance to America or to the cause of Moslem moderation.”

“As the head of a sovereign Moslem state with a large and devout constituency, his public presentation to an American Jewish audience will inevitably resonate far beyond ourselves and our immediate community. Assuredly it will be an event which will be carefully scrutinized and assessed in many parts of the world. Assuredly, it will have consequences.

In our discussions with him last May, I acknowledged President Musharraf's support for America in the war against Islamic terrorism; his publicly raising the possibility of establishing normal relations with Israel; and his doctrine of "Enlightened Moderation," encouraging Moslems to embrace pluralism, openness, and tolerance.

"President Musharraf indicated that he had tested the domestic waters over the Israel issue, and felt that diplomatic ties could only follow an Israeli-Palestinian agreement."

"President Musharraf reacted positively to our suggestion that during his September visit to New York for the summit of international leaders at the United Nations, he should present his "Enlightened Moderation," doctrine to an American Jewish audience, speaking from an explicitly American Jewish platform."

"I am therefore pleased to announce that President Musharraf has formally accepted our invitation to address the American Jewish leadership gathered under AJCongress-Council for World Jewry auspices."

"This unprecedented event will take place on the evening of September 17 in New York City at the Marriott Hotel. This major leader from a Moslem powerful nation will publicly deliver a major policy address to American Jews, hoping that his message will be heard by Americans as well as by his fellow Moslems everywhere."

"In the short term, reaching out to authentic Moslem leaders may carry some risk. But the greater risk would be to forgo the long term benefits derived from finding a leader – especially one of the magnitude of President Musharraf – who is willing to be a voice of moderation and reason."

(COURTESY: Rizvi)
__________________
[FONT=Trebuchet MS][COLOR=Blue]Do not wish for less problems, Wish for more Skills.[/COLOR][/FONT]
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old Sunday, September 25, 2005
Senior Member
Medal of Appreciation: Awarded to appreciate member's contribution on forum. (Academic and professional achievements do not make you eligible for this medal) - Issue reason: Appreciation
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Karachi
Posts: 18
Thanks: 0
Thanked 204 Times in 12 Posts
Diplomat is on a distinguished road
Default Worth reading

Diplomatic faux pas?

By Andleeb Abbas

General Pervez Musharraf may come across as a flamboyant media-savvy person, but at the recent UN summit, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh won himself more trust in the eyes of the world than his Pakistani counterpart

Is the honeymoon over? This is the burning question troubling most minds after the Musharraf-Manmohan Singh meeting at the UN summit. A meeting which was supposed to make active progress in settling disputes, ended on a limp note with both parties making the usual ramblings of more of it next time.

The recent hardline statements and postures by Pakistan and India have an uncomfortable twist to them. The Indian prime minister’s claims in his speech that cross border militancy has not stopped, Musharraf’s attempt to restore relations with Israel ending in Palestinian retaliation, and of course those disastrous remarks by the president on women using rape as an excuse for moving to Canada resulting in the Canadian prime minister’s objections — all these faux pas at the UN summit have left a sour political taste making many people wondering as to what is the political future of this country.

This Musharraf-Singh meeting had already been adversely affected by the sentencing of Sarabjit Singh for carrying out a series of bomb blasts in 1990 in Pakistan. The case had received wide publicity in India and the government had come under tremendous political pressure to intervene. Indian Foreign Minister Natwar Singh met Pakistan’s high commissioner in Delhi, and asked for Singh to be pardoned on humanitarian grounds. However, Pakistan did not relent causing a hardening of stances at the UN summit.

That is how it goes in this strange world. For some it is a time for worries, apprehension, and consternation; for others it is a time for rejoicing, revelling and celebration. In the former category come Pakistan and many other Muslim countries, while in the latter cadre come India and many other US blessed countries. Such a contrast in fortunes of Pakistan and India has rarely been witnessed before. India already heralded as the second major economic force along with China, managed to get confirmation from the US for its total support, nuclear or economic, while Pakistan already suffering from an image of instability, got a confirmation of being a terrorist hub post-London blasts. All turns in history are preceded by conflicts all across the world and the present conflict and its response in the West in the last few weeks is perhaps an indicator of the new world order to follow.

A WAR OF WORDS: As Manmohan Singh made selected and pointed remarks on Pakistan’s continuous support to terrorists, Musharraf’s rather impulsive and elaborate rhetoric on rape victims angered many in the US and within the country. It seems that unlike India’s clear and clever foreign moves, Pakistan’s foreign policy is in a shambles. The president’s meeting with the Iraqi president and the chance meeting with Ariel Sharon at the UN summit along with his address to the Jewish lobby, have not won Pakistan many friends in Iraq and Palestine. Without a clear-cut strategy the president seemed to adopt the typically chaotic stance of “we did, we said, but we did not really mean it”, which, actually shows political immaturity. The president completely lost his cool when at a press conference human right activists questioned his comments on women exploiting rape to get visas. Instead of using this meeting to promote Pakistan’s soft image, it became an ugly bout of confrontations in which the president actually said “I am a fighter, I will fight you and if you can shout I will shout louder”. It became so bad that the president had to be led away and counselled for a while to make him capable of controlling himself, before being sent back to resume the meeting. Denials never win you much credibility. After the summit it has been a constant line of denials, of no trade with Israel, no offence to the NGOs and women, and no problems with the relationship with India. This continuous back-tracking of issues has become the hallmark of Pakistan’s foreign policy and has put the government’s local and international credibility at stake.

THE FRIENDLY ENEMIES: It all started with the glaring contradiction in the treatment meted out to Indian and Pakistani prime ministers on their visit to America a few weeks ago. The Indian Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh not only got a rousing welcome in the US, but got a lot more than what India may have hoped for; while the Pakistani Prime Minister, Shaukat Aziz had to call off his scheduled visit to the US, as he probably would not have got the same protocol and reception; just as well, as the contrast was striking and delivering a very important message about the political inclinations of the White House.

Manmohan Singh was invited to address the joint session of US congress, an honour given to very few heads of state, and the response to his speech showed how pro-India US policy-makers are. One must give credit to Indian think-tanks who helped prepare the speech. It was a master piece of shrewd diplomacy. All the right topics, phrases and words were used. Buzzwords and phrases like ‘commitment to democracy’ are guaranteed applause-bait, and they did not disappoint. References to initiatives jointly agreed on between President George W Bush and Prime Minister Singh, too, invited and got applause; as did a reference to the achievements of the Indian American community. References to the need for a hard line on terrorism, without sacrificing the openness that characterizes democracies of the US and India, were similarly guaranteed to go down well with the assembled law-makers of both houses. They did.

The cleverly worded and articulated part of the speech was the one referring to the US and India as natural partners. “Partnerships can be of two kinds,” Manmohan Singh told the eager congress. “There are partnerships based on principle, and partnerships based on pragmatism. I believe we are at a juncture where we can embark on a partnership that can draw both on principle as well as pragmatism.”

The speech was the classic case of killing two birds with one stone. He not only marketed India as a model of democracy and economic progress, but also subtly highlighted Pakistan’s lack of democracy and inability to handle and curb terrorism. Of course, nothing binds countries together more than common enemies and shared interests. Thus, the Assistant Secretary of State, Christina Rocca’s insistence of complete restoration of democracy in Pakistan on her recent visit is almost predictable.

MUTUAL REWARDS: The “too close for comfort” US-India relations on display during last month’s visit to Washington by India’s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, thus, is a result of a well-planned strategic statecraft. India is a rising power in Asia, a democracy integrating into the global economy, a foe of terrorist fanatics, and a potential counterweight to China. Thus the reward for such multi-benefits was that Bush agreed to sell to India desperately needed nuclear fuel for the US-built civilian reactors in Tarapur and to provide components for such reactors.

Though India agreed on placing its civilian nuclear reactors under International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards, prolonging its moratorium on nuclear weapons tests, accepting guidelines of the International Nuclear Suppliers’ Group that ban the proliferation of fissile material, and adhering to the Missile Technology Control Regime, these compliances are still not enough. India is still not permitting full-scope IAEA safeguards for its military as well as civilian facilities, nor has it agreed to curtail development of its nuclear weapons and delivery systems. By allowing India to have the advantages of being one of the acknowledged nuclear powers without signing onto the Non-Proliferation Treaty, Bush passed India’s litmus test — its price for permitting a true strategic partnership with Washington. The West has hailed this as Bush’s recognition of the value of such a partnership on the basis that it may be a reassuring sign that he and his advisers are coming to understand that the United States cannot move alone in the world. However, the message of Bush’s nuclear deal with India to other countries that might be pondering a pursuit of nuclear weapons could hardly be worse. They are being shown that acquiring those ultimate terror weapons can be a steppingstone to recognition as a major power and that, after a decent interlude, they can expect to be pardoned for developing and testing those weapons. Why are Pakistan, Iran and North Korea not given the same concessions? The answer is simple. None of them present the economic might and political advantages India has.

India is a huge market for US businesses and a convenient and capable outsourcing centre for their operational functions. GE Chief Executive Jeff Immelt, one of the most influential businessman in the US, a contributor to Bush’s presidential campaigns, had a coveted seat at the president’s table during this announcement. For GE, one of the largest and the only US-owned company still in the nuclear business, it marked a possible turning point in a years-long push to re-enter the Indian nuclear power market, which it was forced to leave in 1974 when India conducted its first nuclear test. Immelt — who said in May that “all conditions are right to invest in India” and predicted that GE revenues from there could jump to $5 billion by 2010 — was not the only American executive at the state dinner with a reason to court Manmohan Singh. Bush also invited Lockheed Martin Corp. chief Bob Stevens and Boeing Co.’s new chief executive, James McNerney. Bush cleared the way in March for the two defence contractors to compete for a potential $9 billion market selling combat planes to India. GE makes jet engines for Lockheed and Boeing. Thus India is a very important market for the gigantic defence industry of America.

According to a report, Condoleezza Rice also spoke to President Musharraf and said that his reaction was “constructive” and “not overly problematic”. Thus India gets away once again with concessions which are openly violating the very principles on which the US has based its peace and security treaties. While Pakistan can just moan and blame its bad luck.

The Indian prime minister is definitely a smooth opportunist. In order to cash upon the anti-British and American sentiments in the Muslim world, and in particular in Pakistan, the Indian prime minister highlighted two facts in his public speeches. One, that in the recent survey on American image abroad, India turned out to be the country with the highest favourable rating for America and its policies, thus emphasizing that Americans were more popular in India than in America itself, and secondly, the amazing statement he made in which he categorically claimed that the British were the best colonial rulers in the world despite admitting that the economy of the subcontinent went to ruins under their rule. These statements at a time, when both the US and the UK are desperate and hungry for support for their rather tarnished international image, are definitely food from manna for the two countries.

INBRED FRAGILITY: In times of crisis the true strength of a nation emerges. For Pakistan it is really a time for taking tough decisions. To take tough decisions you need tough leaders. The president and the prime minister are under all sorts of pressures to take steps which may or may not be in national and international interests. Very clear commands from the British and American governments have come for a ruthless hounding and extermination of any madressah, organization or individual with the slightest of suspicion of being involved in any form of anti-western intentions. In compliance to these commands, the government has started the clean-up operation, which in turn, has created a great deal of resentment and reaction in many national circles who feel that the legitimate and clean madressahs are also being hounded unnecessarily in this process. The decision to oust all foreign students is simply ridiculous, as those who preach hatred, that is, the teachers, are still there to make the usual mischief.

CONCLUSION: While India steadily plays the role of the peace loving, purposeful emerging power, Pakistan struggles to establish any definite international identity, thus the constant insecurity of being economically abandoned and politically stranded.

At the meeting at the UN, the Indian premier seems to have managed to win the world by his crafty diplomacy. On the other hand, the belief in style over substance, as far as saying and doing is concerned, is the undoing of the present government. President Musharraf may have developed an impressive rhetoric and may come across as a flamboyant media-savvy person, he still lacks the ability to put action into words. His constant chant of enlightened moderation has been quoted over various media across the world, but his dithering over controlling immoderate elements, and his indiscreet comments about the NGOs has decreased his credibility. In contrast the Indian prime minister comes across as a-man-of-few-words leader, but his belief in action speaking louder than words has won him more trust than his Pakistani counterpart. The self-reliance policy of India and a higher focus on education and skill development has paid off, as today India is recognized as a power to be. In contrast, relying on external aid, both political and economic, and the lack of focus on education and skill development, have led to Pakistan being viewed as a powerless and vulnerable state, which can be exploited and manipulated for vested and western interests. As the saying goes: “The fault, dear friend, does not lie within our stars, but within ourselves.”
__________________
[COLOR=Navy][SIZE=4]Shoot for the moon even if you miss, you will land among the stars.[/SIZE][/COLOR]
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Constitution of the United States Muhammad Adnan General Knowledge, Quizzes, IQ Tests 3 Saturday, February 01, 2020 02:25 AM
History of Presidentship in Pakistan Naseer Ahmed Chandio General Knowledge, Quizzes, IQ Tests 1 Tuesday, May 31, 2011 03:00 PM
indo-pak relations atifch Current Affairs 0 Monday, December 11, 2006 09:01 PM
Israel And Jewish Community After World War II maiji Current Affairs Notes 0 Wednesday, November 29, 2006 01:07 AM


CSS Forum on Facebook Follow CSS Forum on Twitter

Disclaimer: All messages made available as part of this discussion group (including any bulletin boards and chat rooms) and any opinions, advice, statements or other information contained in any messages posted or transmitted by any third party are the responsibility of the author of that message and not of CSSForum.com.pk (unless CSSForum.com.pk is specifically identified as the author of the message). The fact that a particular message is posted on or transmitted using this web site does not mean that CSSForum has endorsed that message in any way or verified the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message. We encourage visitors to the forum to report any objectionable message in site feedback. This forum is not monitored 24/7.

Sponsors: ArgusVision   vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.