The New Nation - Internet Edition

Muslim-Christian conference

SOME 150 religious leaders and academics at a four-day conference, first of a series of Muslim-Christian dialogues hosted by the USA's Yale University, ended in Connecticut the other day and adopted a declaration by consensus affirming the unity between the two faiths and the absoluteness of Allah or God. As reported by news agencies, similar Christian-Muslim talks would be held around the world and such future events will be hosted in Britain, at the Vatican and in Jordan with the objectives of promoting inter-faith dialogue for peace.

Christians and Muslims should work together or face possible violence that risks turning into genocide, Jordan's King Abdullah's adviser Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad bin Talal warned the conference saying Christians and Muslims mistrust each other 'so much that a few terrorist attacks could trigger dramatic and violent religious tensions'. A recent global survey showed that 60 per cent of Christians disliked Muslims and 30 per cent of Muslims reciprocate. Christians and Muslims routinely mistrust, disrespect and dislike each other, if not popularly and actively rubbish, dehumanise, demonise, despise and attack each other, one speaker pointed out.

The conference of Muslim and Christian academics, scholars and theologians is aimed at promoting interfaith dialogue for better understanding, peace and stability, particularly when the world itself has now become so volatile with the launching of 'war on terror' targeting purely in religious line. An analysis of our recent past--the second half of the twentieth century--shows there has been no conflict, but rather an alliance, between Christian and Muslim civilisations. Harvard Prof. Samuel Huntington emphasised the territoriality of the conflict, but German Prof. Ulrich Beck questions this aspect though they agree that there is a continuing conflict between the two civilisations. Islam now is the fastest growing faith in the world.

Private medical care

PRIVATE health care facilities are filling gaps both in terms of quantity and quality in extending health care to people in the country. Therefore, there are arguments in favour of enlarging the private health care system in the country. Pathological laboratories, private clinics and heart treatment facilities of international standard have been established in recent years. As a result, the effectiveness of investigations and treatment in these fields have improved and also the costs of treatment have fallen because basing on these new medical units patients, who previously went abroad for treatment at high costs, can now get the same treatment at home.

The expanding role of the private sector medical care has been well received by the people. The only concern, however, in this expansion is about quality. So far, the growth of private medical care has presented the patients with mixed results. In some cases, and these are limited in number, patients can expect to get high quality service while in many other cases they do not get their money's worth. Reports frequently appear in the press about sub-standard private clinics or those even having no registration or approval from the authorities to operate. Some private medical colleges have been set up which appear to be seriously deficient in imparting proper education to students.

Thus, there is a pressing need to improve regulation to enforce standard of service in the private health sector. But, at the same time, the government should opt for policy measures such as making imported medical equipment and the like cheaper, plus reducing various charges and duties affecting the investors in private medical care facilities. These steps can be immensely helpful in accelerating investments in this field and should also contribute in the longer term to reducing the current drain of resources on foreign medical care by Bangladeshis.

Science and spirituality in promoting peace

Dr. A.S.M. Badruddoza

Today the world is facing an array of global challenges and threats in the forms of various kinds of violence such as nuclear war, chemical and biological warfare, terrorism, etc. We are having tremendous anxiety, fear, and unrest in the lives of all of us for having experienced many events recently happened in this world. In fact, every responsible person feels to have an intense yearning for peace and harmony in every part of this globe.

The objectives of this paper is to bring together prominent scientists, religious and spiritual leaders, social and peace activists, intellectuals, educationists, scholars and students, and youths from all around the world to have dialogues on science and spirituality for creating a culture of peace and harmony. Einstein, the greatest scientist remarked, "Science without religion is lame and religion without science is blind". He noted, "Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe - a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we, with our modest powers, must feel humbled."

The spiritual or religious worldview in its purest form develops the moral nature of humanity by understanding the inner dimension of reality. The Bhagavad-gita proclaims as, "Mamaivamso jivaloke jivabhuta sanatanah", meaning : "Life is a transcendental entity and is a part and parcel of the Supreme Lord and is eternal." On the other hand, science has made tremendous progress in various frontiers of knowledge such as, electronics and computer science, transportation and communication, space science and technology, medical science and medical technology and so on.

While there is a progress of scientific culture it is also vital that humanity does not neglect spiritual culture. Spirituality transcends all walls of separation among communities despite differences in cultures, traditions and religions.

It must be very beneficial if the scientists and the religious groups could come together and discuss how to live peacefully by engaging in a very serious dialogue on how to use their respective fields of knowledge for the betterment of the whole human family.

Our sincere hope is that the two most dominant forces-Science and Spirituality-on cooperative approach toward constant dialogue between prominent scientists and spiritualists along with interfaith dialogue may change the world to eternal peace.

Islam does not encourage war. In early days, the first battle fought was battle of "Bader". The 2nd and the 3rd all were defensive battles. The first attempt taken by Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) to go to 'Makkah' for Pilgrimage was aborted by himself. He made a treaty with the "Quaraish" in Makkah and came back. Next time when he conquered 'Makkah' he excused everyone. He told that if someone did not like to accept Islam he can do it without any fear.

Islam aims to build a peaceful society at all cost. It is because higher human objectives cannot be achieved in the absence of peaceful circumstances. The spiritual as well as moral progress of the individual is possible only in peaceful atmosphere.

To bring about an atmosphere of peace within the society Islam has given a number of commandments. For instance, the Prophet of Islam observed 'A believer is one from whom people feel secure as regards their lives and property (Al-Tirmizi). Another hadith has this to say: By God, he is not a believer from whose nuisance his neighbour is not safe. (Al-Bukhari)

When God created heaven and the earth. He so ordered things that each part might perform its function peacefully without clashing with any other part. For billions of years, therefore, the entire universe has been fulfilling its function in total harmony with His divine plan. Peace is no extemal commodity to be artificially imposed upon man. Peace is inherent in nature itself.

Spirituality and Science is seen by many as two separate things. What we normally call Science is that which we can measure, see and prove. From that perspective, Spirit maybe the last thing to find in any microscope. The science of Spirituality may be not so easily measured from the parameters used in normal science .

The religious impact on global events and policy needs much deeper exploration.

The Washington-based Centre for Strategic and International Studies has produced a study stating that religion has been systematically neglected as a factor in international affairs, as reported in the book, Religion, the Missing Dimension of Statecraft (edited by Douglas Johnston and Cynthia Sampson).

For years, the Princeton Religion Research Centre has reported the close connection between religion and individual and societal health, concluding:

1. (Religious feelings have spurred much of the volunteerism in our nation for good cause). Members of a church or synagogue, as revealed in a Gallup Poll, tend to be much more involved in charitable activity than non-members.

2. Seventy-four percent of adults say religion in their homes has strengthened family relationships, while 82 percent say that religion was important in their homes when they were growing up.

3. Eight in ten Americans report that religious beliefs help them to respect and assist other people.

4. While only 4 percent say their beliefs have little or no effect on their lives, 63 percent state that their beliefs keep them from doing things they know they should not do.

In sum, the religious liberty most Americans cherish and celebrate has enabled religion to flourish in many forms and to become a profound shaper of the American character.

Steps to ensure peace in the world

* Science is to increase international peace, security and co-operation, the social and economic development of mankind, the promotion of human rights and the protection of the environment,

* Affirming, in particular, the need for scientists to establish a free and open dialogue between one another, and with political leaders and the public in general, with regard to scientific developments and their present and potential implications for our civilisation,

* Considering the importance of encouraging scientists to work towards constructive objectives, to improve the climate for arms control and disarmament, and to promote a dialogue on important topics in connection with the positive contributions that scientific knowledge can make to peace, security and ecological balance,

* Fostering a culture of peace through education by promoting education for all, focusing especially on girls; revising curricula to promote the qualitative values, attitudes and behaviour inherent in a culture of peace; training for conflict prevention and resolution, dialogue, consensus building and active non-violence t

* Promoting sustainable economic and social development by targeting the eradication of poverty; focusing on the special needs of children and women; working towards environmental sustainability; fostering national and international co-operation to reduce economic and social inequalities.

* Promoting respect for all human rights by distributing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights at all levels and fully implementing international instruments on human rights.

* Ensuring equality between women and men by integrating a gender perspective and promoting equality in economic, social and political decision-making; eliminating all forms of discrimination and violence against women; supporting and aiding women in crisis situations resulting from war and all other forms of violence .

* Fostering democratic participation by educating responsible citizens; reinforcing actions to promote democratic principles and practices; establishing and strengthening national institutions and processes that promote and sustain democracy .

* Advancing understanding, tolerance and solidarity by promoting a dialogue among civilisations; actions in favour of vulnerable groups, migrants, refugees and displaced persons, indigenous people and traditional groups; respect for difference and cultural diversity . * Supporting participatory communication and the free flow of information and knowledge by means of such actions as support for independent media in the promotion of a culture of peace; effective use of media and mass communications; measures to address the issue of violence in the media; knowledge and information sharing through new technologies.

* Promoting international peace and security through action such as the promotion of general and complete disarmament; greater involvement of women in prevention and resolution of conflicts and in promoting a culture of peace in post-conflict situations; initiatives in conflict situations; encouraging confidence-building measures and efforts for negotiating peaceful settlements .

Islam is an Arabic Word which means peace, purity, acceptance and commitment. The religion of Islam is the complete acceptance of the teachings and guidance of God (Allah being His proper name). i.e. surrender to the Will of God.

Hinduism also advocates peace. Wars taught in old ages and there found in religious books are always defensive battles and for true cause.

Ashoka the Great embraced "Buddhism" and turned into an advocate of peace from a blood thirsty monarch.

Christianity advises to offer a second cheek if someone slaps you.

All options on the table?

Noam Chomsky

NUCLEAR threats and counter-threats are a subtext of our times, steadily, it seems, becoming more insistent. The July meeting in Geneva between Iran and six major world powers on Iran's nuclear programme ended with no progress.

The Bush administration was widely praised for having shifted to a more conciliatory stand - namely, by allowing a US diplomat to attend without participating - while Iran was castigated for failing to negotiate seriously. And the powers warned Iran that it would soon face more severe sanctions unless it terminated its uranium enrichment programs.

Meanwhile India was applauded for agreeing to a nuclear pact with the United States that would effectively authorise its development of nuclear weapons outside the bounds of the Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), with US assistance in nuclear programmes along with other rewards - in particular, to US firms eager to enter the Indian market for nuclear and weapons development, and ample payoffs to parliamentarians who signed on, a tribute to India's flourishing democracy.

Michael Krepon, co-founder of the Stimson Center and a leading specialist on nuclear threats, observed reasonably that Washington's decision to "place profits ahead of nonproliferation" could mean the end of the NPT if others follow its lead, sharply increasing the dangers all around.

During the same period, Israel, another state that has defied the NPT with Western support, conducted large-scale military manoeuvres in the eastern Mediterranean that were understood to be preparation for bombing Iran's nuclear facilities.

In a New York Times Op-Ed article, "Using Bombs to Stave Off War," the prominent Israeli historian Benny Morris wrote that Iran's leaders should welcome Israeli bombing with conventional weapons, because "the alternative is an Iran turned into a nuclear wasteland."

Purposely or not, Morris is reviving an old theme. During the 1950s, leading figures of Israel's governing Labor Party advised in internal discussion that "we will go crazy ("nishtagea") if crossed, threatening to bring down the Temple Walls in the manner of the first "suicide bomber," the revered Samson, who killed more philistines by his suicide than in his entire lifetime.

Israel's nuclear weapons may well harm its own security, as Israeli strategic analyst Zeev Maoz persuasively argues. But security is often not a high priority for state planners, as history makes clear. And the "Samson complex," as Israeli commentators have called it, can be flaunted to warn the master to carry out the desired task of smashing Iran, or else we'll inflame the region and maybe the world.

The "Samson complex," reinforced by the doctrine that "the whole world is against us," cannot be lightly ignored. Shortly after the 1982 invasion of Lebanon, which left some 15-20,000 killed in an unprovoked effort to secure Israel's control of the occupied territories, Aryeh Eliav, one of Israel's best-known doves, wrote that the attitude of "those who brought the 'Samson complex' here, according to which we shall kill and bury all the Gentiles around us while we ourselves shall die with them," is a form of "insanity" that was then all too prevalent, and still is.

US military analysts have recognised that, as Army Lt. Col. Warner Farr wrote in 1999, one "purpose of Israeli nuclear weapons, not often stated, but obvious, is their 'use' on the United States," presumably to ensure consistent U.S. support for Israeli policies - or else. Others see further dangers. Gen. Lee Butler, former commander-in-chief of the US Strategic Command, observed in 1999 that "it is dangerous in the extreme that in the cauldron of animosities that we call the Middle East, one nation has armed itself, ostensibly, with stockpiles of nuclear weapons, perhaps numbering in the hundreds, and that inspires other nations to do so." This fact is hardly irrelevant to concerns about Iran's nuclear programmes, but is off the agenda.

Also off the agenda is Article 2 of the UN Charter, which bars the threat of force in international affairs. Both US political parties insistently proclaim their criminality, declaring that "all options are on the table" with regard to Iran's nuclear programmes.

Some go beyond, like John McCain, joking about what fun it would be to bomb Iran and to kill Iranians, though the humour may be lost on the "unpeople" of the world, to borrow the term used by British historian Mark Curtis for those who do not merit the attention of the privileged and powerful.

Barack Obama declares that he would do "everything in my power" to prevent Iran from gaining the capacity to produce nuclear weapons. The unpeople surely understand that launching a nuclear war would be "in his power".

The chorus of denunciations of the New Hitlers in Teheran and the threat they pose to survival has been marred by a few voices from the back rooms. Former Mossad Chief Ephraim Halevy recently warned that an Israeli attack on Iran "could have an impact on us for the next 100 years."

An unnamed former senior Mossad official added, "Iran's achievement is creating an image of itself as a scary superpower when it's really a paper tiger" - which is not quite accurate: The achievement should be credited to US-Israeli propaganda. One of the participants in the July meetings was Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit, who outlined "the Arab position": "to work toward a political and diplomatic settlement under which Iran will maintain the right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes" but without nuclear weapons.

The "Arab position" is that of most Iranians, along with other unpeople. On July 30, the 120-member Nonaligned Movement reiterated its previous endorsement of Iran's right to enrich uranium in accord with the NPT.

Joining the unpeople is the large majority of Americans, according to polls. The American unpeople not only endorse Iran's right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes but also support the "Arab position" calling for a nuclear-weapons-free-zone in the entire region, a step that would sharply reduce major threats, but is also off the agenda of the powerful; unmentionable in electoral campaigns, for example.

Benny Morris assures us that "Every intelligence agency in the world believes the Iranian programme is geared toward making weapons." As is well-known, the US National Intelligence Estimate of November 2007 judged "with high confidence that in fall 2003, Teheran halted its nuclear weapons programme." It is doubtful, to say the least, that the intelligence agencies of every country of the NAM disagree.

Morris is presumably reporting information from an Israeli intelligence source - which generalizes to "every intelligence agency" by the same logic that instructs us that Iran is defying "the world" by seeking to enrich uranium: the world apart from its unpeople.

There are rumblings in radical nationalist (so-called "neocon") circles that if Barack Obama wins the election, Bush-Cheney should bomb Iran, since the threat of Iran is too great to be left in the hands of a wimpish Democrat. Reports also have surfaced - recently from Seymour Hersh in The New Yorker - on US "covert operations" in Iran, otherwise known as international terrorism.

In June, Congress came close to passing a resolution (H. Con. Res. 362), strongly supported by the Israeli lobby, virtually calling for a blockade of Iran - an act of war, that could have set off the conflagration that is greatly feared in the region and around the world. Pressures from the anti-war movement appear to have beaten back this particular effort, according to Mark Weisbrot at Alternet.org, but others are likely to follow.

The government of Iran merits severe condemnation on many counts, but the Iranian threat remains a desperate construction of those who arrogate to themselves the right to rule the world, and consider any impediment to their just rule to be criminal aggression. That is the primary threat that should concern us, as it concerns saner minds in the West, and the unpeople of the rest of the world.

(Noam Chomsky's writings on linguistics and politics have just been collected in "The Essential Noam Chomsky," edited by Anthony Arnove, from the New Press. Chomsky is emeritus professor of linguistics and philosophy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, Mass.)